Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper - Rights Of Non-residents, The Privileges And Immunities Of United States Citizens, Variety Of Opinions
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Kathryn A. Piper
That the New Hampshire state law limiting admission to the bar to residents did not violate the Constitution's Privileges and Immunities Clause.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Martin L. Gross
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr. (writing for the Court), John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
William H. Rehnquist
Date of Decision
4 March 1985
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit that New Hampshire's limiting of bar admission to state residents violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause.
The practice of law was held to be a business like any other, protected by the federal guarantee against state-to-state discrimination.
- Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission, 436 U.S. 371 (1978).
- Hicklin v. Orbeck, 437 U.S. 518 (1978).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Supreme Court of Virginia v. Friedman - Significance, Higher Courts' Decisions, Higher Courts' Decisions Affirmed, Impact, Privileges And Immunities Clause: Residency Requirements
- South Dakota v. Dole - Significance, Legal Drinking Age, A Four-part Test, Dissent: 158 Attempts To Regulate
- Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper - Rights Of Non-residents
- Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper - The Privileges And Immunities Of United States Citizens
- Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper - Variety Of Opinions
- Other Free Encyclopedias