Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana
E15223
Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Montana’s higher elk-hunting license fees for nonresidents and narrowed the scope of the Privileges and Immunities Clause to exclude purely recreational activities.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T132270 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana Context triple: [Privileges and Immunities Clause, keyCase, Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana]
-
A.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
B.
United States v. Butler
United States v. Butler was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal’s Agricultural Adjustment Act as an unconstitutional use of federal taxing and spending power.
-
C.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
D.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
E.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana Target entity description: Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Montana’s higher elk-hunting license fees for nonresidents and narrowed the scope of the Privileges and Immunities Clause to exclude purely recreational activities.
-
A.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
B.
United States v. Butler
United States v. Butler was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal’s Agricultural Adjustment Act as an unconstitutional use of federal taxing and spending power.
-
C.
Craig v. Boren
Craig v. Boren is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that established intermediate scrutiny as the standard for evaluating gender-based classifications under the Equal Protection Clause.
-
D.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
E.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
court decision ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
Equal Protection jurisprudence
ⓘ
Privileges and Immunities jurisprudence ⓘ United States constitutional law ⓘ constitutional law ⓘ |
| citation | 436 U.S. 371 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article IV, Section 2 of the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1978 ⓘ |
| dissentingJustices |
John Paul Stevens
ⓘ
William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| geographicLocation | Montana ⓘ |
| holding |
Montana may charge higher elk-hunting license fees to nonresidents than to residents
ⓘ
differential elk-hunting license fees for nonresidents do not violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ recreational hunting is not a fundamental right protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ the Privileges and Immunities Clause does not apply to purely recreational activities ⓘ |
| impact |
affirmed broad state authority over wildlife management
ⓘ
cited as precedent in later cases involving nonresident hunting and fishing fees ⓘ narrowed the scope of the Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
Montana
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Montana
United States of America ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| keyPrinciple |
commercial and livelihood-related activities receive greater Privileges and Immunities protection than recreational activities
ⓘ
fundamental rights under the Privileges and Immunities Clause are limited to activities bearing upon the vitality of the nation as a single entity ⓘ states may treat residents and nonresidents differently in access to recreational resources ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ
surface form:
Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV
discrimination against nonresidents ⓘ |
| majorityJustices |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ Lewis F. Powell Jr. ⓘ Potter Stewart ⓘ Thurgood Marshall ⓘ Warren E. Burger ⓘ William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ |
| partyType |
individual hunter
ⓘ
state administrative agency ⓘ |
| petitioner | Baldwin ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Hicklin v. Orbeck
ⓘ
Toomer v. Witsell ⓘ |
| relatedDoctrine |
state ownership and control of wildlife
ⓘ
state police power ⓘ |
| respondent | Fish and Game Commission of Montana ⓘ |
| stateParty | Montana ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
elk hunting licenses
ⓘ
nonresident hunting fees ⓘ state wildlife regulation ⓘ |
| vote | 7-2 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana Description of subject: Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission of Montana is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Montana’s higher elk-hunting license fees for nonresidents and narrowed the scope of the Privileges and Immunities Clause to exclude purely recreational activities.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.