The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Wednesday, October 5, 1977
Decision: Tuesday, May 23, 1978
Issues: Civil Rights, Residency Requirements

Advocates

James H. Goetz (Argued the cause for the appellants)
Paul A. Lenzini (Argued the cause for the appellees)

Facts of the Case

In its licensing system for elk-hunters, the state of Montana required nonresidents to pay a substantially higher fee than residents for a hunting permit.

Question

Did the Montana law violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution as delineated in Article IV, Section 2?

Conclusion

The Court affirmed the right of Montana to charge higher fees for out-of-state elk hunters. Justice Blackmun found that the Privileges and Immunities Clause only applied to activities which bear "on the vitality of the Nation as a single entity." Since elk hunting is a recreational activity and not fundamental to the survival of nonresidents of Montana, Blackmun argued that it did not fall within the scope of the protections guaranteed by the Constitution. "Equality in access to Montana elk is not basic to the maintenance or well-being of the Union," he concluded.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Decision: 6 votes for Fish & Game Commission of Montana, 3 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Article 4, Section 2, Paragraph 1: Privileges and Immunities Clause
Wrote a dissent
Brennan
Voted with the minority, joined Brennan's dissent
Marshall
Voted with the minority, joined Brennan's dissent
White
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Wrote the majority opinion
Blackmun
Voted with the majority
Stewart
Voted with the majority
Powell
Wrote a regular concurrence
Burger
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Full Opinion by Justice Harry A. Blackmun

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Baldwin v. Fish & Game Commission of Montana, 436 U.S. 371 (1978),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_1150/>
(last visited ).