Supreme Court of the United States

Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana

May 23, 1978436 U.S. 371

Summary

The Court affirmed the judgment rejecting challenges to Montana's resident-nonresident elk-hunting license disparities. It held that recreational elk hunting is not a privilege or immunity protected by Article IV and that the licensing differences rationally further Montana's interests in conserving elk and managing enforcement, so they do not violate equal protection. Chief Justice Burger concurred to emphasize Montana's special interest in its elk and the limits of the holding; Justice Brennan, joined by Justices White and Marshall, would have required a more demanding justification for the discrimination and would have reversed.

Holding

  • Privileges and Immunities Clause. Recreational elk hunting by nonresidents is not a privilege or immunity protected by Article IV, § 2, so Montana may prefer residents in access to elk hunting and may impose higher license fees and different licensing requirements on nonresidents.
  • Equal Protection Clause. Montana's higher nonresident license fees and combination-license requirement do not violate equal protection because they are rationally related to legitimate state interests in conserving a finite elk population, limiting hunter days, funding and administering wildlife management, and addressing greater enforcement difficulties associated with nonresident hunting.

Docket 76-1150

Cited authorities

  • Wis. Stat. § 29.105
  • Wis. Stat. § 29.109
  • Wis. Stat. § 29.12
  • Alaska Stat. Ann. § 16.05.340
  • Colo. Rev. Stat. § 33-4-102
  • Wis. Stat. §§ 29.10
  • 50 Stat. 917
  • 16 U.S.C. §§ 669

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF