SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA v. FRIEDMAN

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
87-399
Appellee 
Friedman
Appellant 
Supreme Court of Virginia
Opinion 
Advocates
(Argued the cause for the appellee)
(Argued the cause for the appellants)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Myrna Friedman, a resident of Maryland, was hired at a law firm located in the state of Virginia. Virginia law made permanent residency a requirement for admission to the Virginia bar without taking the bar examination. After Friedman's appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court was turned down, her claim was upheld in federal district court.

Question 

Did the Virginia law violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution?

Conclusion 
Decision: 7 votes for Friedman, 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Article 4, Section 2, Paragraph 1: Privileges and Immunities Clause

In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that Virginia's residency requirement was unconstitutional. The Court held that "'one of the privileges which the Clause guarantees to citizens of State A is that of doing business in State B on terms of substantial equality with the citizens of that State,'" and that the practice of law was sufficiently basic to the economy to be deemed a privilege protected by the Clause. The Court found that the regulation discriminated among otherwise equally qualified applicants solely on the basis of residency, failing to bear a close relation to a substantial state interest.

Cite this Page
SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA v. FRIEDMAN. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 24 October 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_87_399>.
SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA v. FRIEDMAN, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_87_399 (last visited October 24, 2014).
"SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA v. FRIEDMAN," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed October 24, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_87_399.