Also known as: privileges and immunities clause · privileges or immunities · 14th Amendment privileges and immunities · P&I clause
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional guarantee that no state shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. The clause protects a limited set of rights of national citizenship, including the right to travel and the right to pursue a common calling on equal terms with residents of the host state.
Pilar Pena moved from State A to State B for work. State B capped her welfare payments at the lower amount she would have received in State A and imposed a one-year waiting period for full benefits. Pilar challenged the cap. The restriction treated her differently from longer-term residents solely because of her recent arrival and violated her right to equal treatment upon exercising the right to travel.
Parker Phillips relocated from State C to State D and applied for welfare. State D limited new residents to the benefit level of their prior state for one year. Parker sued. The waiting period penalized the exercise of the right to travel and denied equal treatment to newly arrived citizens.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pablo Perez, licensed in State E, applied for admission in State F. State F required one year of prior residency. Pablo sued after denial. The residency rule blocked nonresidents from the common calling of law practice without substantial justification.
Priscilla Parks, admitted in State G, sought reciprocal admission in State H. State H imposed a residency requirement for reciprocity. Priscilla challenged the rule. The barrier prevented nonresidents from practicing law on equal terms absent a substantial state interest.
Pamela Phillips purchased property subject to a racially restrictive covenant. State courts enforced the covenant against her. Pamela claimed the enforcement abridged her privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States.
Perry Pratt challenged a state law enacted under Congress's enforcement authority. The law exceeded the scope of the privileges or immunities guarantee. Perry argued the measure could not validly abridge rights protected by the clause.
No. The clause protects natural persons who are citizens of the United States. Corporations are not citizens within the meaning of the clause and therefore receive no protection from it.
Supporting sources
It protects the right to travel and to receive equal treatment with longer-term residents in matters such as welfare benefits. A state may not impose a waiting period or reduce benefits based solely on the length of residency.
Supporting sources
No. Residency requirements that discriminate against nonresidents in the practice of law violate the clause unless the state shows a substantial justification closely related to the discrimination.
Supporting sources
…they have been denied the equal protection of the laws, deprived of property without due process of law, and have been denied privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. We pass to a consideration of those issues. I. Whether the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment inhibits judicial enforcement by state courts of restrictive covenants…