Privileges and Immunities

Abstract 

       The purpose of this law review article is to compare and contrast Justice Thomas separate and concurring opinion with that of the majority in the landmark case of McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 08-1521 June 28, 2010.   The primary issue in this case was whether or not the Second Amendment is incorporated into the Due Process Clause or the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment so as to be applicable to the States, thereby invalidating ordinances prohibiting possession of handguns in the home. The author believes that the majority opinion is correct to incorporate the Second Amendment but not through the Due Process Clause but rather through the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

 The privileges and immunities clause prevents discrimination against people from out of state, but only in respect of fundamental rights. The court employs a two-part test to determine whether the privileges and immunities clause has been violated. First, he looks to see whether a law discriminates against people from out of state respect of fundamental rights (for example. protection by the government on the enjoyment of life, liberty and the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety). These lines often focus on the economic right to pursue a life. The second part of the test focuses on whether the state is justified in discriminating. It examines whether there is a substantial reason for the difference in treatment, and whether the discriminatory law has a substantial connection with that reason. It examines whether there is a substantial reason for the difference in treatment, and whether the discriminatory law has a substantial connection with that reason. (Freund,2006)

Monarchial concessions were further made in 1628, when the Parliament forced King Charles I to sign the Petition of Rights. This document contains a list of grievances that parallels many of the complaints chronicled in the Declaration of Independence and an assortment of rights contained in the U.S. Constitution (1787). For example, the Petition of Rights declares that the monarch may not (a) arrest legislators when attending Parliament (Article I, Section 6.1 of the U.S. Constitution provides a similar immunity for members of Congress); (b) force civilians to house and feed soldiers (the Third Amendment of the U.S. Constitution contains a similar proscription); (c) levy taxes without approval from the House of Commons (Article I, Section 7.1 likewise mandates that revenue bills originate in the House of Representatives or a lower house); (d) incarcerate citizens without showing just cause (Article I, Section 9.2 of the U.S. Constitution limits the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus); (e) charge persons with a crime without a grand jury trial (this is echoed in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution); or (f) take away private property without providing just compensation (this is similarly found in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution). (Corner, 2005)

Introduction

The focus of this entry is on the concept of rights rather on justifying ...