> The state has no power to regulate out of state companies. No matter how much the state wants to, it just doesn't have that power. I don't think that's an ac

> The state has no power to regulate out of state companies. No matter how much the state wants to, it just doesn't have that power. I don't think that's an accurate interpretation. I believe what the judge was saying was that the law, as written, was vague and put an undue burden on out-of-state retailers. That is unconstitutional because it discriminates against a set of retailers by forcing those businesses to complete a unique burden (complex paperwork) that in-state retailers do not. Essentially, the law was intended to create an incentive for internet retailers to collect sales tax by requiring that they complete a ridiculous procedure if they do not. That is the undue burden.