Also known as: Privileges and Immunities Clause · Article IV Section 2 · P&I Clause
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional provision guaranteeing that citizens of each state shall enjoy the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states. The clause protects fundamental rights such as pursuing a common calling and engaging in ordinary economic activity on substantially equal terms with residents of the forum state. It requires a substantial reason for any discrimination against nonresidents and a close fit between that reason and the means employed.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Phoebe Park, a citizen of State A, accepted an engineering job at Crown Metal in State B and relocated there. State B denied her a manufacturing equipment grant available only to prior residents. The denial prevented Phoebe from obtaining tools essential to her new role on equal terms with long-term State B residents.
Pablo Perez, a licensed attorney residing in State A, applied for admission to the State B bar without examination under a reciprocity provision. State B denied the application solely because Pablo did not reside in State B, even though he maintained an office there and offered to meet all local requirements. The residency barrier prevented Pablo from practicing his profession on equal terms with State B residents.
Phuong Pham, an attorney in good standing in State A, sought reciprocal admission in State B under a rule limited to in-state residents. State B rejected the application because Phuong lived across the border, despite her willingness to designate a local agent and complete required continuing education. The restriction blocked Phuong from pursuing her common calling on equal footing with State B residents.
Patricia Patel, a citizen of State A, moved to State B and applied for public assistance benefits. State B imposed a one-year residency requirement before new arrivals could receive aid. The waiting period delayed Patricia's access to benefits available immediately to long-term State B residents.
Paul Peterson, a citizen of State A, enrolled his children in public school after moving to State B. State B attempted to charge tuition or exclude the children because the family had not resided in the state for a full year. The policy treated the children differently from those of long-term State B residents in accessing public education.
Pavel Petrov, a citizen of State A visiting State B, suffered an unlawful search and seizure by State B officers. Pavel sued the officers in federal court under federal civil rights law for violating rights protected against state infringement. The suit proceeded on the theory that the officers' conduct infringed privileges secured to out-of-state citizens.
Yes. The clause protects the fundamental right of citizens to engage in a common calling on substantially equal terms with residents of the forum state. Residency requirements that bar nonresidents from bar admission without examination violate the clause absent a substantial justification closely related to the discrimination.
Supporting sources
…Amendment, as a whole , makes the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. This would certainly include the language of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, as well as the Due Process Clause. [^maj-37]: For a more thorough exposition of my views against this approach to the Due Process Clause, see my concurring opinion in Rochin v.…
…the resolution: "Is it not essential to the unity of the people that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States
…See Spies v. Illinois , 123 U. S. 131. Decisions that particular guarantees were not safeguarded against state action by the Privileges and Immunities Clause or other provision of the Fourteenth Amendment are: United
…See also Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U. S. 183, 193-199 (1968). [^maj-62]: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States
…any involuntary reduction or combination of a State's territory, Art. IV, § 3; the Judicial Power Clause, Art. III, § 2, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause
No. The clause forbids states from withholding privileges related to the pursuit of a livelihood from citizens of other states. A grant program available only to prior residents discriminates on the basis of state citizenship and violates the clause when it places new arrivals at a competitive disadvantage in their work.
Supporting sources
No. The clause does not compel states to subsidize nonresidents with every public benefit. Purely recreational or non-fundamental programs may be limited to residents, but benefits tied directly to the pursuit of a livelihood receive protection against citizenship-based discrimination.
Supporting sources
A state must show a substantial reason for the discrimination and demonstrate that the means are closely related to that reason. Speculative concerns about nonresident behavior or general fiscal interests rarely suffice when the discrimination closes off fundamental economic opportunities.
Supporting sources