Toomer v. Witsell (1948) - Revision history

Admin: Admin moved page Toomer v. Witsell to Toomer v. Witsell (1948)

2019-10-21T19:48:06Z

Admin moved page Toomer v. Witsell to Toomer v. Witsell (1948)

Admin at 19:31, 13 May 2019

2019-05-13T19:31:03Z

Morgannoel18 at 08:31, 28 October 2017

2017-10-28T08:31:16Z

Admin at 20:17, 28 September 2017

2017-09-28T20:17:37Z

Nicole: Created page with "In ''Toomer v. Witsell'' (1948), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated South Carolina’s policy of requiring state residents to pay a $25 per boat license fee for shrimp gatheri..."

2017-02-06T16:17:44Z

Created page with "In ''Toomer v. Witsell'' (1948), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated South Carolina’s policy of requiring state residents to pay a $25 per boat license fee for shrimp gatheri..."

New page

In ''Toomer v. Witsell'' (1948), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated South Carolina’s policy of requiring state residents to pay a $25 per boat license fee for shrimp gathering while nonresidents were charged $2,500 per boat as violative of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which assures that “the Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several states.” Traditionally, courts had held that the privileges and immunities that are protected by this clause are only those that are “fundamental,” so that the test always involved an inquiry into whether the discrimination against nonresidents involved a fundamental right. In ''Toomer'', however, the Court added a new dimension to the test, inquiring whether the discrimination bears a substantial relationship to the problem that the state is attempting to deal with.

==== Ellis Katz ====

SEE ALSO: [[Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission]]; [[Corfield v. Coryell]]; [[Privileges and Immunities Clause: Article IV]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 13 May 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	In ''Toomer v. Witsell'' (1948), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated South Carolina’s policy of requiring state residents to pay a $25 per boat license fee for shrimp gathering while nonresidents were charged $2,500 per boat as violative of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which assures that “the Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several states.” Traditionally, courts had held that the privileges and immunities that are protected by this clause are only those that are “fundamental,” so that the test always involved an inquiry into whether the discrimination against nonresidents involved a fundamental right. In ''Toomer'', however, the Court added a new dimension to the test, inquiring whether the discrimination bears a substantial relationship to the problem that the state is attempting to deal with.	+	In ''Toomer v. Witsell'' (1948), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] invalidated South Carolina’s policy of requiring state residents to pay a $25 per boat license fee for shrimp gathering while nonresidents were charged $2,500 per boat as violative of the [[Privileges and Immunities Clause: Article IV\|Privileges and Immunities Clause]] of Article IV of the [[U.S. Constitution]], which assures that “the [[Citizenship\|Citizens]] of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several states.” Traditionally, courts had held that the privileges and immunities that are protected by this clause are only those that are “fundamental,” so that the test always involved an inquiry into whether the discrimination against nonresidents involved a fundamental right. In ''Toomer'', however, the Court added a new dimension to the test, inquiring whether the discrimination bears a substantial relationship to the problem that the state is attempting to deal with.

	==== Ellis Katz ====		==== Ellis Katz ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:17, 28 September 2017
Line 4:		Line 4:

	SEE ALSO: [[Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission]]; [[Corfield v. Coryell]]; [[Privileges and Immunities Clause: Article IV]]		SEE ALSO: [[Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission]]; [[Corfield v. Coryell]]; [[Privileges and Immunities Clause: Article IV]]
		+
		+	[[Category:Supreme Court Cases]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:48, 21 October 2019
(No difference)

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 ==== Ellis Katz ====
 SEE ALSO: [[Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission]]; [[Corfield v. Coryell]]; [[Privileges and Immunities Clause: Article IV]]
 [[Category:Supreme Court Cases]]