- Study Aids
- By product
- By subject
- Law School Success
- Bar Review
State A extensively regulates commercial fishing within the state to protect its fishing industry. As part of this regulatory scheme, State A requires both resident and nonresident commercial fishers to purchase commercial fishing permits from the state.
To raise more revenue for the agency charged with implementing the regulatory program, State A amends the fees for fishing permits. Under the new permit scheme, nonresidents of State A will pay more than residents for permits. The new regulations require residents to pay $100 per individual per year for permits and nonresidents to pay $1,000—10 times the amount residents pay—for an identical permit. There is no evidence that nonresident commercial fishermen impose a greater burden on the industry or cost more to regulate.
After the implementation of the law, 75 percent of the nonresident fishermen with permits decide not to renew them for the subsequent year.
F is a commercial fisherman from State B who has operated his fishing company in State A for many years. F is shocked at the new price of his nonresident permit and decides to bring a lawsuit against the state. He argues that the new permitting scheme violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV.