WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST URGENT 37.
Akbar runs an ice cream shop. His state government passed a law raising taxes on dairy products over a hundredfold, believing that dairy products were unhealthy. Akbar sued the state for arbitrary taxation. The case was being appealed to the federal courts when the state repeals the tax before collecting any money. Would the federal courts still review the case?

A) No; Akbar lacked standing to bring the case to the courts.

B) No; state laws are not challengeable in federal courts.

C) No; the case is moot since the law was repealed.

D) Yes; there’s a federal interest in preventing similar cases.

D) Yes; there’s a federal interest in preventing similar

Explanation:

Akbar definitely has standing as he is affected by the tax law. State laws are challengeable in federal courts if they affect interstate trade. There is a federal interest here as the state laws affect the interstate trade of ice cream.

However the reason the federal courts would NOT review this case is because the case is moot since the law was repealed.

The answer is C).

C

Explanation:

The answer is  

C) No; the case is moot since the law was repealed.

i think it can have both positive and negative effects on businesses.

for example:

lets say you own a small business and taxes go up 4% that means it is going to cost your business more money to buy product to sell. but at the same time you make more money from the tax rise.

that is my theory.

explanation:

magic