Final answer:
The law in question would be assessed under the Equal Protection Clause, and if consumer choice is deemed a legitimate government interest, the law might be considered legal. The question of due process violations may also arise but could be less applicable to this situation.
Step-by-step explanation:
The legality of a state law that prohibits paper companies with more than 200 employees from selling only narrow-lined paper would be analyzed under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Equal Protection Clause requires that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, focusing on civil rights and anti-discrimination.
Option c suggests that the law would be legal under the Equal Protection Clause because consumer choice may be a legitimate government interest. This could be considered a rational basis for differentiating between companies based on their size if the state could argue that a diverse market in paper products is beneficial to consumers and that larger companies have a bigger impact on market diversity.
However, the question of whether this law violates the Due Process Clause, either procedural or substantive, might also arise. Procedural due process concerns the procedures that the government must follow when it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. Substantive due process refers to the protection of fundamental rights from government interference. It might be argued that the law is not the least restrictive means of achieving its goals, but such an argument would more likely be pursued under the principles of free speech or free commercial enterprise rather than due process.