Article 4 What Are The Privileges and Immunities

What Are The Privileges and Immunities

What Are The Privileges and Immunities

The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution is one of the most important provisions of the document that protects the rights of United States citizens within the country. It is included in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1, and reads:

“The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”

This clause is intended to ensure that no state can treat citizens from another state differently or unfairly. It is a key component of the protection of individual rights and liberties, and is critical to the functioning of the entire U.S. legal system. In this article, we will explore the history behind the Privileges and Immunities Clause, its significance to U.S. citizens, how it has been applied throughout U.S. history, and some of the controversies surrounding the clause.

The History of the Privileges and Immunities Clause

The Privileges and Immunities Clause can be traced back to the Articles of Confederation, the predecessor to the U.S. Constitution. The Articles had a similar clause that stated:

“The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states.”

This clause was written in response to concerns that some states were placing excessive restrictions on out-of-state citizens. The Founding Fathers recognized the need for a strong national government that could protect the rights of all United States citizens, regardless of where they lived.

At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Privileges and Immunities Clause was a key topic of discussion. Some delegates were concerned that the provision was too vague and could be interpreted in a way that would lead to federal overreach. Other delegates argued that the clause was essential to protect the rights of citizens and ensure that states could not discriminate against people from other states.

Ultimately, the Privileges and Immunities Clause was included in the Constitution with the goal of preventing states from stifling interstate commerce and interfering with the free movement of people across state lines. This ensured that citizens of any state could travel to other states without fear of being treated unfairly.

What are the “Privileges and Immunities”?

The Privileges and Immunities that are protected by the clause are those that are fundamental to citizenship, such as the right to travel freely between states, the right to vote, and the right to engage in lawful employment and business activities. These are rights that are essential to being a full and equal citizen of the United States, regardless of which state one resides in.

The protections of the Privileges and Immunities Clause extend to all United States citizens. This means that a citizen of one state is entitled to the same rights and protections as a citizen of any other state, even if they are temporarily residing in that state. For example, if a Californian travels to New York, they are entitled to all the same rights and privileges as a New Yorker.

The clause does not protect all rights, however. Some rights, such as the right to hunt, are not considered fundamental to citizenship and are therefore not protected by the clause. The courts have determined which rights are protected by the clause on a case-by-case basis, usually based on whether the right is essential to the concept of citizenship or whether it would significantly affect interstate relations.

The Significance of the Privileges and Immunities Clause

The Privileges and Immunities Clause is critical to ensuring that United States citizens are treated fairly across state lines. It protects the rights of individuals to engage in lawful business, obtain gainful employment, and participate in the political process. Without this clause, states could discriminate against citizens from other states, which would create a patchwork of inconsistent regulations and laws.

The clause also has significant implications for interstate commerce. It ensures that states cannot put up barriers to trade or impede the free flow of goods between states. This is a crucial aspect of our modern economy, where businesses must operate across state lines in order to be successful.

Additionally, the Privileges and Immunities Clause ensures that the United States remains a truly unified country. It promotes the idea of citizenship as a shared experience, where all citizens are entitled to the same fundamental rights and protections. This helps to promote a sense of national identity and solidarity, which is vital for maintaining a functional and cohesive country.

The Application of the Privileges and Immunities Clause

Over the years, the Privileges and Immunities Clause has been used to protect a wide range of rights and activities. One important case that helped to define the scope of the clause was the Supreme Court case of Corfield v. Coryell in 1823. In that case, the Court found that the clause protected certain fundamental rights that were “common to the citizens of all free governments,” such as the right to own property and the right to have access to the courts.

Another important case was the Supreme Court’s decision in the 1869 case of Paul v. Virginia. In that case, the Court found that the clause did not apply to insurance contracts, as they were not a fundamental right of citizenship.

The clause has also been used to protect the rights of individuals to engage in lawful activities, even if those activities are prohibited in their home state. For example, in the 1999 case of Saenz v. Roe, the Supreme Court found that states could not restrict the welfare benefits of new residents who had recently moved to the state. The court found that this restriction violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause, as it interfered with the right of citizens to travel and engage in lawful business and employment.

Some of the more recent applications of the Privileges and Immunities Clause have been in the realm of same-sex marriage. In 2013, the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had defined marriage as between a man and a woman. In the years that followed, a number of states attempted to restrict the rights of same-sex couples to marry. However, the Privileges and Immunities Clause was used to strike down many of these restrictions, as they violated the fundamental right of individuals to engage in lawful activities and to be treated equally under the law.

Controversies Surrounding the Privileges and Immunities Clause

Despite its importance, the Privileges and Immunities Clause has been the subject of controversy over the years. One of the main areas of concern has been the “state action” limitation on the clause. This limitation means that the clause only applies to actions that are taken by the government or state actors. Private individuals or businesses are not required to abide by the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which has led to criticisms that the clause does not go far enough to protect individual rights.

Another controversy has arisen over the scope of the clause. Some argue that it should be expanded to protect more rights and activities, while others believe that the clause should be narrowed in order to prevent federal overreach. This debate has been ongoing for many years, and is likely to continue in the future.

Conclusion

The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution is a critical component of the protection of individual rights and liberties. It ensures that all United States citizens are entitled to the same fundamental rights and protections, regardless of which state they reside in. The clause has been used in a wide range of cases over the years, and has had a significant impact on the protection of interstate commerce, the promotion of a national identity, and the protection of individual rights. Despite some controversies surrounding the clause, it remains a critical part of our legal system and a key protector of our most fundamental rights and liberties.


The Privileges and Immunities Clause as set forth in Article 4, Section 2 states that states may not prevent citizens from their basic rights according to that which is exhibited by civil rights statutes.

In such a way, any discriminatory practices whatsoever are not tolerated. In order to be more specific, it states that citizens of all locales will be made eligible for the attainment of such outlined “privileges and immunities” set forth for all citizens.

This stems from the “Articles of Confederation” where State residents are entitled to all privileges afforded to United States citizens alike. This Clause was also found within the Federalist Papers where Alexander Hamilton outlined that such a clause actually created contention as to the relationships between that of a State and citizens from varying states. In his description of privileges and immunities, he also went so far as to use “privileges” and “rights” as one and the same.

In Corfield v. Coryell, the Supreme Court determined and set forth what exactly the privileges and immunities within the United States Constitution entailed. These included that they are “fundamental in terms of its foundation, belonging solely to that of the citizens of all free governments and will have been enjoyed by the citizens of the several states which compose this Union.” This will have encompassed the time from which the United States had acquired its full and concurrent freedom in accordance with the United States Constitution.

Yet another case that exemplified the ideals of privileges and immunities is that of Magill v. Brown. In that case, it was once again ruled that such privileges and immunities be afforded to all citizens of the State in which they resided. In addition, however, other statements seemed to contrast this. They did, however, come to an agreement in deeming that they wished for a “general citizenship” to exist between all states under the United States Constitution. In this way, there would be no concern over the differences in treatment in relation to one’s state of residence. This represented an area by which the United States Constitution may be adequately practiced.

The Privileges and Immunities Clause represents an area by which all citizens may be granted with what is prescribed as their natural rights as attached to the country as well. This continues to reign as an area by which citizens may look to for protection.