BlundersoftheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates Part5

2011DanGoodman TheauthorhaswrittenonfourblundersoftheSupremeCourtoftheUnited States.Originally,hedecidedtowriteononlytwomistakesmadebytheSupreme CourtoftheUnitedStates.However,theauthorhasreconsideredafterwriting aboutthethirdblunderoftheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStatestonotplaceany limitonthenumberofblundershefindswiththeSupremeCourtoftheUnited States.Withthatsaid. ThefifthblunderoftheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStatesisinthecaseof Colgatev.Harvey(296U.S.404,1935).Theblunderoccursatpage427: Section2ofArticleIVoftheConstitutioncontainstheprovision,"TheCitizens ofeachStateshallbeentitledtoallPrivilegesandImmunitiesofCitizensinthe severalStates. TheFourteenthAmendment,1,provides: AllpersonsbornornaturalizedintheUnitedStates,andsubjecttothe jurisdictionthereof,arecitizensoftheUnitedStatesandoftheStatewhereinthey reside.NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates;... Thus,thedualcharacterofourcitizenshipismadeplainlyapparent.Thatisto say,acitizenoftheUnitedStatesisipsofactoandatthesametimeacitizenofthe stateinwhichheresides.Colgatev.Harvey:296U.S.404,at427(1935).
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3719480264320489813&q

Accordingtothiscase,acitizenoftheUnitedStatesisacitizenofaStateunder ArticleIV,Section2,Clause1oftheConstitution.Thatprivilegesandimmunitiesof acitizenoftheUnitedStatesarelocatedintheFourteenthAmendmentwhereas privilegesandimmunitiesofacitizenoftheUnitedStates,asacitizenofaState,are tobefoundinArticleIV,Section2,Clause1oftheConstitution. However,thisiswrong! 1

AcitizenoftheUnitedStatesisacitizenofaStateunderSection1,Clause1ofthe FourteenthAmendment,notArticleIV,Section2,Clause1oftheConstitutionofthe UnitedStatesofAmerica: AsregardstheprovisionoftheConstitutionthatcitizensofeachStateshallbe entitledtoalltheprivilegesandimmunitiesofcitizensintheseveralStates,the plaintiffinheraffidavithasstatedveryclearlyacasetowhichitisinapplicable. Theprotectiondesignedbythatclause,ashasbeenrepeatedlyheld,hasno applicationtoacitizenoftheStatewhoselawsarecomplainedof.Iftheplaintiff wasacitizenoftheStateofIllinois,thatprovisionoftheConstitutiongaveherno protectionagainstitscourtsoritslegislation. Theplaintiffseemstohaveseenthisdifficulty,andattemptstoavoiditby statingthatshewasborninVermont. WhilesheremainedinVermontthatcircumstancemadeheracitizenofthat State.Butshestates,atthesametime,thatsheisacitizenoftheUnitedStates, andthatsheisnow,andhasbeenformanyyearspast,aresidentofChicago,in theStateofIllinois. TheFourteenthAmendmentdeclaresthatcitizensoftheUnitedStatesare citizensofthestatewithintheyreside;thereforetheplaintiffwasatthetimeof makingherapplication,acitizenoftheUnitedStatesANDacitizenoftheStateof Illinois. Wedonotheremeantosaythattheremaynotbeatemporaryresidenceinone State,withintenttoreturntoanother,whichwillnotcreatecitizenshipinthe former.Buttheplaintiffstatesnothingtotakehercaseoutofthedefinitionof citizenshipofaStateasdefinedbythefirstsectionofthefourteenth amendment.Bradwellv.theStateofIllinois:83U.S.130,at138(1873).[Footnote 1]
http://books.google.com/books?id=DkgFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA138#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Inaddition,privilegesandimmunitiesofacitizenofaStatearenotinArticleIV, Section2,Clause1oftheConstitution,rathertheyareintheconstitutionandlawsof aparticularState: ...Whatevermaybethescopeofsection2ofarticleIVandweneednot,in thiscaseenteruponaconsiderationofthegeneralquestiontheConstitutionof theUnitedStatesdoesnotmaketheprivilegesandimmunitiesenjoyedbythe citizensofoneStateundertheconstitutionandlawsofthatState,themeasureofthe 2

privilegesandimmunitiestobeenjoyed,asofright,byacitizenofanotherState underitsconstitutionandlaws.McKanev.Durston:153U.S.684,at687(1894).
http://books.google.com/books?id=mmkUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA687#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Also,ArticleIV,Section2,Clause1relatestoacitizenofaState,whoisnota citizenoftheUnitedStates: ...IntheConstitutionandlawsoftheUnitedStates,thewordcitizenis generally,ifnotalways,usedinapoliticalsensetodesignateonewhohasthe rightsandprivilegesofacitizenofaStateoroftheUnitedStates.Baldwinv. Franks:120U.S.678,at690(1887).[Footnote2]

http://books.google.com/books?id=c04GAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA690#v=onepage&q&f=false

...Thereisnoinherentrightinacitizentothussellintoxicatingliquorsby retail.ItisnotaprivilegeofacitizenoftheStateorofacitizenoftheUnited States.Crowleyv.Christensen:137U.S.86,at91(1890).

http://books.google.com/books?id=htIGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=false

Anotherobjectiontotheactisthatitisinviolationofsection2,art.4,ofthe constitutionoftheUnitedStates,andofthefourteenthamendment,inthatthisact discriminatesbothastopersonsandproducts.Section2,art.4,declaresthatthe citizensofeachstateshallbeentitledtoalltheprivilegesandimmunitiesofthe citizensoftheseveralstates;andthefourteenthamendmentdeclaresthatnostate shallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesandimmunitiesof citizensoftheUnitedStates.Butwehaveseenthatthesupremecourt,inCrowleyv. Christensen,137U.S.91,11Sup.Ct.Rep.15,hasdeclaredthatthereisnoinherent rightinacitizentosellintoxicatingliquorsbyretail.Itisnotaprivilegeofacitizen ofastateorofacitizenoftheUnitedStates.Cantiniv.Tillman:54Fed.Rep.969, at973(1893).
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ehg4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA973#v=onepage&q&f=false

Theconstitutionalprovisiontherealludedtodidnotcreatethoserights,which itcalledprivilegesandimmunitiesofcitizensoftheStates.Itthrewaroundthemin thatclause(ArticleIV,Section2,Clause1)nosecurityforthecitizenoftheStatein whichtheywereclaimedorexercised.Nordiditprofesstocontrolthepowerofthe Stategovernmentsovertherightsofitsowncitizens. ItssolepurposewastodeclaretotheseveralStates,thatwhateverthoserights, asyougrantorestablishthemtoyourowncitizens,orasyoulimitorqualify,or imposerestrictionsontheirexercise,thesame,neithermorenorless,shallbethe 3

measureoftherightsofcitizensofotherStateswithinyourjurisdiction. SlaugherhouseCases:83U.S.(16Wall.)36,at77(1873).[Footnote3]
http://books.google.com/books?id=DkgFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA77#v=onepage&q&f=false

Thus,acitizenoftheUnitedStates,underSection1oftheFourteenthAmendment, canbealsoacitizenofaState,underSection1,Clause1oftheFourteenth Amendment,byresidinginaparticularState.NotArticleIV,Section2,Clause1of theConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica.[Footnote4] ________________________ Footnotes: 1.ThiscaseisnextaftertheSlaughterhouseCases(83U.S(16Wall.)36,1873)in theboundvolumesoftheUnitedStatesReports(ontheSupremeCourtoftheUnited States). 2.WecometothecontentionthatthecitizenshipofEdwardswasnotaverredin thecomplaintorshownbytherecord,andhencejurisdictiondidnotappear. Inansweringthequestion,whethertheCircuitCourthadjurisdictionofthe controversy,wemustputourselvesintheplaceoftheCircuitCourtofAppeals,and decidethequestionwithreferencetothetranscriptofrecordinthatcourt. HadthetranscriptshownnothingmoreastothestatusofEdwardsthanthe avermentofthecomplaintthathewasaresidentoftheStateofDelaware,assuch anavermentwouldnotnecessarilyhaveimportedthatEdwardswasacitizenof Delaware,anegativeanswerwouldhavebeenimpelledbypriordecisions.Mexican CentralRy.Co.v.Duthie,189U.S.76;Hornev.GeorgeH.HammondCo.,155U.S.393; Dennyv.Pironi,141U.S.121;Robertsonv.Cease,97U.S.646.Thewholerecord, however,maybelookedto,forthepurposeofcuringadefectiveavermentof citizenship,wherejurisdictioninaFederalcourtisassertedtodependupon diversityofcitizenship,andiftherequisitecitizenship,isanywhereexpressly averredintherecord,orfactsarethereinstatedwhichinlegalintendment constitutesuchallegation,thatissufficient.Hornev.GeorgeH.HammondCo.,supra andcasescited. 4

Asthisisanactionatlaw,weareboundtoassumethatthetestimonyofthe plaintiffcontainedinthecertificateoftheCircuitCourtofAppeals,andrecitedto havebeengivenonthetrial,waspreservedinabillofexceptions,whichformed partofthetranscriptofrecordfiledintheCircuitCourtofAppeals.Beingapartof therecord,andpropertoberesortedtoinsettlingaquestionofthecharacterof thatnowunderconsideration,Robertsonv.Cease,97U.S.648,wecometoascertain whatisestablishedbytheuncontradictedevidencereferredto. Inthefirstplace,itshowsthatEdwards,priortohisemploymentontheNewYork SunandtheNewHavenPalladium,waslegallydomiciledintheStateofDelaware. Next,itdemonstratesthathehadnointentiontoabandonsuchdomicil,forhe testifiedunderoathasfollows:OneofthereasonsIlefttheNewHavenPalladium was,itwastoofarawayfromhome.IlivedinDelaware,andIhadtogobackand forth.MyfamilyareoverinDelaware.Now,itiselementarythat,toeffectachange ofoneslegaldomicil,twothingsareindispensable:First,residenceinanew domicil,and,second,theintentiontoremainthere.Thechangecannotbemade, exceptfactoetanimo.Botharealikenecessary.Eitherwithouttheotheris insufficient.Mereabsencefromafixedhome,howeverlongcontinued,cannotwork thechange.Mitchellv.UnitedStates,21Wall.350. AsDelawaremust,then,beheldtohavebeenthelegaldomicilofEdwardsatthe timehecommencedthisaction,haditappearedthathewasacitizenofthe UnitedStates,itwouldhaveresulted,byoperationoftheFourteenth Amendment,thatEdwardswasalsoacitizenoftheStateofDelaware.Anderson v.Watt,138U.S.694.Bethisasitmay,however,Delawarebeingthelegaldomicilof Edwards,itwasimpossibleforhimtohavebeenacitizenofanotherState,District, orTerritory,andhemustthenhavebeeneitheracitizenofDelawareoracitizen orsubjectofaforeignState.Ineitherofthesecontingencies,theCircuitCourt wouldhavehadjurisdictionoverthecontroversy.But,inthelightofthetestimony, wearesatisfiedthattheavermentinthecomplaint,thatEdwardswasaresidentof theStateofDelaware,wasintendedtomean,and,reasonablyconstrued,mustbe interpretedasaverring,thattheplaintiffwasacitizenoftheStateofDelaware. Jonesv.Andrews,10Wall.327,331;ExpressCompanyv.Kountze,8Wall.342.Sun Printing&PublishingAssociationv.Edwards:194U.S.377,at381thru383(1904).
http://books.google.com/books?id=tekGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA381#v=onepage&q&f=false

Also: TheactwasconsideredinJohnsonv.UnitedStates,160U.S.546,andwethere heldthatapersonwhowasnotacitizenoftheUnitedStatesatthetimeofan allegedappropriationofhispropertybyatribeofIndianswasnotentitledto maintainanactionintheCourtofClaimsundertheactinquestion.Therewasnot inthatcase,however,anyassertionthattheclaimantwasacitizenofaStateas 5

distinguishedfromacitizenoftheUnitedStates....[U]ndoubtedlyinapurely technicalandabstractsensecitizenshipofoneoftheStatesmaynotinclude citizenshipoftheUnitedStates...Unquestionably,inthegeneralandcommon acceptation,acitizenoftheStateisconsideredassynonymouswithcitizenofthe UnitedStates,andtheoneisthereforetreatedasexpressiveoftheother.This flowsfromthefactthattheoneisnormallyandusuallytheother,andwhere suchisnotthecase,itispurelyexceptionalanduncommon.UnitedStatesv. NorthwesternExpress,Stage&TransportationCompany:164U.S.686,688(1897).

http://books.google.com/books?id=xOQGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA688#v=onepage&q=&f=false

3.Thereisalsothefollowing: TwoclausesoftheUnitedStatesConstitutionareinvoked:2ofart.4,which declaresthatThecitizensofeachStateshallbeentitledtoallprivilegesand immunitiesofcitizensintheseveralStates,andpartof1ofthe14thAmendment: NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates;norshallanyStatedepriveanypersonof life,libertyorproperty,withoutdueprocessoflaw,nordenytoanypersonwithin itsjurisdictiontheequalprotectionofthelaws. AcomparisonofthestatuteunderreviewwiththeothergamelawsoftheState showsthat,withregardtohuntinggame,greaterrestrictionsareplaceduponnon residentsthanuponresidents,andthatthepenaltiesincurredbytheformerfor violatingtherestrictionsimposedaresevererthanthoseincurredbythelatter. Thediscriminationsofthestatutearenotbaseduponthefactofcitizenship,nor doesitappearbytherecordbeforeusthattheprosecutorwasacitizeneitherofa sisterStateoroftheUnitedStates.Consequently,2ofarticle4andsomuchof the14thAmendmentassecurestheprivilegesandimmunitiesofthecitizenofthe Nationarenotapplicabletothecaseinhand.Allenv.Wyckoff:2Cent213(1886).
http://books.google.com/books?id=sRpLAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA213#v=onepage&q&f=false

2.AsappliedtoacitizenofanotherState,ortoacitizenoftheUnitedStates residinginanotherState,astatelawforbiddingsaleofconvictmadegoodsdoes notviolatetheprivilegesandimmunitiesclause[s]ofArt.IV,2andthe[privileges orimmunitiesclauseofthe]FourteenthAmendmentoftheFederalConstitution,ifit appliesalsoandequallytothecitizensoftheStatethatenactedit.P.437.Syllabus, Whitfieldv.StateofOhio:297U.S.431(1936). 1.Thecourtbelowproceededupontheassumptionthatpetitionerwasa citizenoftheUnitedStates;andhisstatusinthatregardisnotquestioned.The 6

effectoftheprivileges[and]orimmunitiesclauseoftheFourteenthAmendment,as appliedtothefactsofthepresentcase,istodenythepowerofOhiotoimpose restraintsuponcitizensoftheUnitedStatesresidentinAlabamainrespectofthe dispositionofgoodswithinOhio,iflikerestraintsarenotimposeduponcitizens residentinOhio.TheeffectofthesimilarclausefoundintheFourthArticleofthe Constitution,asappliedtothesefacts,wouldbethesame,sincethatclauseis directedagainstdiscriminationbyastateinfavorofitsowncitizensandagainst thecitizensofotherstates.SlaughterHouseCases,16Wall.36,1Woods21,28; Bradwellv.State,16Wall.130,138.Opinion,Whitfieldv.StateofOhio:297U.S. 431,at437(1936).
http://supreme.justia.com/us/297/431/(Syllabus) http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13866319457277062642(Opinion)

4.TheblundermadeinColgatev.Harvey,hasbeencarriedforwardtoothercases fromtheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.SeeSupremeCourtofNewHampshirev.Piper (470U.S.274,1985),SupremeCourtofVirginiav.Friedman(487U.S.59,1988).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2926579002341243719&q http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13897281859174153973&q

ComparetoBradwellv.StateofIllinois(83U.S.(16Wall.)130,1873)(also,atpage 139...Certainlymanyprominentanddistinguishedlawyershavebeen admittedtopractice,bothintheStateandFederalcourts,whowerenotcitizensof theUnitedStatesorofanyState.).SeealsoSaenzv.Roe(526U.S.489,1999): Thesecondcomponentoftherighttotravelis,however,expresslyprotected bythetextoftheConstitution.ThefirstsentenceofArticleIV,2,provides: TheCitizensofeachStateshallbeentitledtoallPrivilegesandImmunitiesof CitizensintheseveralStates. Thus,byvirtueofaperson'sstatecitizenship,acitizenofoneStatewho travelsinotherStates,intendingtoreturnhomeattheendofhisjourney,is entitledtoenjoythePrivilegesandImmunitiesofCitizensintheseveralStates thathevisits.ThisprovisionremovesfromthecitizensofeachStatethe disabilitiesofalienageintheotherStates.Paulv.Virginia,8Wall.168,180(1869) ("[W]ithoutsomeprovision...removingfromthecitizensofeachStatethe disabilitiesofalienageintheotherStates,andgivingthemequalityofprivilegewith citizensofthoseStates,theRepublicwouldhaveconstitutedlittlemorethana leagueofStates;itwouldnothaveconstitutedtheUnionwhichnowexists").... 7

Whatisatissueinthiscase,then,isthisthirdaspectoftherighttotravel therightofthenewlyarrivedcitizentothesameprivilegesandimmunities enjoyedbyothercitizensofthesameState.Thatrightisprotectednotonlyby thenewarrival'sstatusasastatecitizen,butalsobyherstatusasacitizenof theUnitedStates.Thatadditionalsourceofprotectionisplainlyidentifiedin theopeningwordsoftheFourteenthAmendment: AllpersonsbornornaturalizedintheUnitedStates,andsubjecttothe jurisdictionthereof,arecitizensoftheUnitedStatesandoftheStatewhereinthey reside.NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates;....Saenzv.Roe:526U.S.489,at501 thru503(1999).
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4721017505990988840&q