This is perhaps one of the most unclear clauses in the Constitution:
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." (Art. IV, Sec. 2, Cl. 1)
"At least four theories have been proffered regarding the purpose of this clause. First, the clause is a guaranty to the citizens of the different States of equal treatment by Congress; in other words, it is a species of equal protection clause binding on the National Government ...
Second, the clause is a guaranty to the citizens of each State of the natural and fundamental rights inherent in the citizenship of persons in a free society, the privileges and immunities of free citizens ...
Third, the clause guarantees to the citizen of any State the rights which he enjoys as such even when he is sojourning in another State; that is, it enables him to carry with him his rights of State citizenship throughout the Union, unembarrassed by state lines...
Fourth, the clause merely forbids any State to discriminate against citizens of other States in favor of its own." (
Source)
My view is that theory 3 is simply absurd. The idea that the laws of one state may be applied within the jurisdiction of another is contrary to reason. Theory 1 and 2 are more reasonable, but I believe that theory 4 is the most accurate.
This, however, gives rise to the question of which "Privileges and Immunities" are protected, i.e., which forms of "discrimination" against non-citizens are prohibited. Obviously, in matters like voting, it would be unreasonable to argue that the clause applies.
