United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden
1984 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden, 465 U.S. 208 (1984), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a city can pressure private employers to hire city residents, but the same exercise of power to bias private contractors against out-of-state residents may be called into account under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution.[1]
Quick Facts United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden, Argued November 28, 1983 Decided February 21, 1984 ...
United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden | |
---|---|
Argued November 28, 1983 Decided February 21, 1984 | |
Full case name | United Building & Construction Trades Council of Camden County and Vicinity v. Mayor and Council of the City of Camden, et al. |
Citations | 465 U.S. 208 (more) 104 S. Ct. 1020; 79 L. Ed. 2d 249; 1984 U.S. LEXIS 26; 52 U.S.L.W. 4187; 100 Lab. Cas. (CCH) ¶ 55,437; 33 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶ 34,151 |
Case history | |
Prior | 88 N.J. 317, 443 A.2d 148 (1982); probable jurisdiction noted, 460 U.S. 1021 (1983). |
Holding | |
A city can pressure private employers to hire city residents, but the same exercise of power to bias private contractors against out-of-state residents may be called into account under the Privileges & Immunities clause. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Marshall, Powell, Stevens, O’Connor |
Dissent | Blackmun |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. Art. IV, § 2, cl. 1 |
Close