Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper was an important states' rights case. At issue were the individual states' abilities to grant privileges to residents that were denied to non-residents. The Supreme Court upheld its ruling that a state must show substantial reason for any difference in treatment between residents and non-residents. Although the New Hampshire Supreme Court argued that such reasons were present in the case of the practice of law, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed.

New Hampshire rules excluded non-residents from its bar. Kathryn Piper, a resident of Vermont who lived about four hundred yards from the New Hampshire border, received permission to take the New Hampshire bar exam by filing a statement of her intent to become a New Hampshire resident. After passing the bar, Piper was not allowed to swear in, and filed an application for an exception from the residency requirement. The New Hampshire Supreme Court denied her request, and she then filed an action in federal district court, claiming that the residency requirement violated Article 4, Section 2 of the United States Constitution.