CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-INTERSTATE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES-STATE'S PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN ITS NATURAL RESOURCES

Authors

Daniel W. Reddin, III, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Plaintiffs, non-residents of South Carolina, brought action to enjoin enforcement of the South Carolina statutes regulating fishing within the three mile maritime belt. The statutes imposed an annual license fee on boats engaged in shrimp fishing of $25.00, if owned by residents, and of $2500.00, if owned by non-residents; it exacted a tax of 1/8 cent per pound on green shrimp taken or "canned, shucked or shipped for market," and it required all licensed boats to unload, pack and properly stamp their catch in South Carolina before shipment to another state. Plaintiffs who fish within and beyond the three-mile limit contended that the statutes were void on the ground, among others, that they make an arbitrary discrimination between residents and non-residents in violation of the privileges and immunities clause, Article IV, section 2 of the United States Constitution, and that they impose a burden on interstate commerce in violation of sections 8 and 10 of Article 1. Held, injunction denied and case dismissed. The South Carolina statutes do not go beyond the power of a state to regulate the taking of fish or animals ferae naturae, the ownership of which is in the state for the benefit of its inhabitants. Toomer v. Witsell, (D.C. S.C. 1947) 73 F. Supp. 371.

Recommended Citation

Daniel W. Reddin, III, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-INTERSTATE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES-STATE'S PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN ITS NATURAL RESOURCES, 46 Mich. L. Rev. 559 (1948).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol46/iss4/10