Hicklin v. Orbeck

E87372
United States Supreme Court case court case

Hicklin v. Orbeck is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Alaska’s local-hire law for violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause by discriminating against nonresident workers.

Jump to: Surface forms Statements Referenced by

Observed surface forms (1)

Surface form Occurrences
Hicklin v. Orbeck, Commissioner, Department of Labor 1

Statements (45)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
court case ⓘ
affectedGroup Alaska resident workers ⓘ
nonresident workers seeking employment in Alaska ⓘ
areaOfImpact nonresident employment discrimination ⓘ
state employment preference laws ⓘ
chiefJusticeAtTimeOfDecision Warren E. Burger ⓘ
citation 437 U.S. 518 ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted Article IV, Section 2 of the United States Constitution ⓘ
surface form: Article IV, Section 2, Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution
constitutionalRightInvolved privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states ⓘ
court Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate 1978 ⓘ
decisionType constitutional review of state statute ⓘ
disposition state statute struck down as unconstitutional ⓘ
fullCaseName Hicklin v. Orbeck self-linksurface differs ⓘ
surface form: Hicklin v. Orbeck, Commissioner, Department of Labor
holding Alaska could not discriminate against nonresident workers in access to employment related to oil and gas development ⓘ
Alaska’s local-hire law violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ
issue constitutionality of Alaska local-hire law favoring residents over nonresidents ⓘ
jurisdiction United States of America ⓘ
surface form: United States
legalSubject Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ
labor and employment law ⓘ
state police power ⓘ
opinionOfTheCourtBy William J. Brennan Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ
petitioner Hicklin ⓘ
principleEstablished economic protectionism against nonresidents is constrained by the Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ
states may not enact broad employment preferences for residents that burden nonresidents’ fundamental rights without substantial justification ⓘ
reasoning Privileges and Immunities Clause ⓘ
surface form: the Privileges and Immunities Clause protects the right of citizens to pursue a common calling in other states

the discrimination against nonresidents was not closely related to the state’s objectives ⓘ
the state failed to show that nonresidents were a peculiar source of the evil the statute was aimed at ⓘ
relatedCase Toomer v. Witsell ⓘ
United Building & Construction Trades Council v. Mayor and Council of Camden ⓘ
relatedConcept interstate mobility of labor ⓘ
right to pursue a common calling ⓘ
respondent Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development ⓘ
surface form: Orbeck, Commissioner, Department of Labor of Alaska
resultForLaw Alaska Hire law invalidated ⓘ
stateParty Alaska ⓘ
statuteAtIssue Alaska Statutes ⓘ
surface form: Alaska Hire law

Alaska Stat. § 38.40.090 (then in force) ⓘ
subjectMatter oil and gas industry employment in Alaska ⓘ
subsequentInfluence cited in later cases evaluating state and local residency preferences for employment ⓘ
timePeriod Burger Court era ⓘ
vote unanimous decision ⓘ
yearArgued 1978 ⓘ
yearDecided 1978 ⓘ

Referenced by (3)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Hicklin v. Orbeck → fullCaseName → Hicklin v. Orbeck self-linksurface differs ⓘ
this entity surface form: Hicklin v. Orbeck, Commissioner, Department of Labor