|
Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana
|
| Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana |
|
Supreme Court of the United States |
Argued October 5, 1977
Decided May 23, 1978
|
| Full case name: |
Lester Baldwin, et al. v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana, et al. |
|
| Holding |
| Recreational hunting is not a fundamental right and therefore is not within the purview of privileges and immunities clause. The Montana statutory does not violate the equal protection clause. |
| Court membership |
Chief Justice: Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices: William J. Brennan, Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens |
| Case opinions |
Majority by: Blackmun
Joined by: Burger, Stewart, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens
Dissent by: Brennan
Joined by: White, Marshall
|
Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana, 436 U.S. 371 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court case in which affirmed the right of the state of Montana to charge higher fees for out of state elk hunters.[1] The Court held that the Montana statutory elk-hunting license scheme is an economic means not unreasonably related to the preservation of a finite resource—elk—and a substantial regulatory interest of that State, and hence does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
See also
References
Further reading
- Howard, J. G. (1978). "The Privileges and Immunities Clause: A Reaffirmation of Fundamental Rights". University of Miami Law Review 33: 691. ISSN 00419818.
- Ramlow, Jim (1977). "Montana Outfitters v. Fish and Game Commission: Of Elk and Equal Protection". Montana Law Review 38: 387. ISSN 00269972.
- Simson, Gary J. (1979). "Discrimination against Nonresidents and the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV". University of Pennsylvania Law Review 128 (2): 379–401. doi:10.2307/3311657.
|
