United Building & Construction Trades Council of Camden County v. Mayor & Council of the City of Camden case brief

United Building & Construction Trades Council of Camden County v. Mayor & Council of the City of Camden case brief summary

465 U.S. 208 (1984)

CASE SYNOPSIS

A municipal ordinance required that at least 40 percent of the employees of contractors and subcontractors working on city construction projects be city residents. Appellant council challenged the ordinance as a violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, U.S. Constitutional Article IV, § 2, cl. 1. The Supreme Court of New Jersey rejected the council's attack, holding that the ordinance discriminated on the basis of municipal, not state, residency.

CASE FACTS
The council challenged state approval of the resident-hiring quota as ultra vires and as unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and Immunities Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause. The state supreme court declined to apply the Privileges and Immunities Clause in the context of a municipal ordinance that had identical effects upon out-of-state citizens and state citizens not residing in the municipal locality. The council appealed, raising the same three challenges. The council abandoned the Commerce Clause challenge, and the 40 percent quota was changed to a hiring goal.

DISCUSSION

• On review, the only challenge left was whether the ordinance violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause. 
• The Court concluded that the challenged ordinance was properly subject to the strictures of the Privileges and Immunities Clause. 
• The ordinance was not immune from constitutional review at the behest of out-of-state residents merely because some in-state residents were similarly disadvantaged. 
• The Court, therefore, reversed the judgment of the state supreme court and remanded the case for a determination of the validity of the ordinance under the appropriate constitutional standard.

CONCLUSION

The Court reversed the state supreme court's judgment in favor of the council and remanded the case for further proceedings.