Login

Login

To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library

Add

Search

Login
Register

Lester Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana

    Brief Fact Summary. A Montana state law required higher fees for hunting for out-of-staters and the Plaintiffs, Lester Baldwin and other recreational hunters (Plaintiffs) challenged the law. The Plaintiffs argued that the law violated their rights under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution (Constitution).

    Synopsis of Rule of Law. A state law, which imposes higher fees for out-of-staters on recreational hunting, is constitutional because it is not a “fundamental right” entitled to protection by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution.

    Facts. The Plaintiffs sued because Montana imposed higher hunting fees on out-of-state hunters than resident hunters. The licensing scheme, which applied to elk-hunting, was at least 7


    Create New Group

      Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following