Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission - Significance
Lester Baldwin, et al.
Fish and Game Commission of Montana
That Montana's state game regulations violated Article IV, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
James H. Goetz
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Paul A. Lenzini
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun (writing for the Court), Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
23 May 1978
Montana's state fish and game laws were constitutional, and the appellant was not entitled to any relief from them.
- Hicklin v. Orbeck, 437 U.S. 518 (1978).
- Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper, 470 U.S. 274 (1985).
- Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman, 487 U.S. 59 (1988).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Lund, Thomas Alan. American Wildlife Law. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
- Ballew v. Georgia - Significance, Fulton County Looks Behind The Green Door, The Court's Social-science Approach
- Bakke V. University of California â€¦ Appeal: 1978 - Reverse Discrimination Claimed, Suggestions For Further Reading
- Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission - Significance
- Other Free Encyclopedias