[roamer_1] My argument with you here is the Constitutional law of reciprocity between the states.What section of the Constitution are you referring to?
Sorry for replying so late... Your reply got lost in my ping list.
Article IV (sect I, primarily), and all the law stemming there from, loosely referred to as the "Reciprocity Clause":
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. [Margin comment: Each state is required to recognize the laws and records (such as licenses) of other states and to enforce rights in its own courts that would be enforced in other state courts.]
Senate.gov: U.S Constitution, Article IV, Section I
Tnanks for the reply. You are, of course aware that the only USSC precedent for interpreting this clause refers ONLY to the idea that one state may not discriminate against citizens of other states in favor of its own citizens? Corfield v. Coryell had to do with, of all things clam digging!!! In it, the court declared that the clause was limited to " “protection by the Government; the enjoyment of life and liberty ... the right of a citizen of one State to pass through, or to reside in any other State, for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional pursuits, or otherwise; to claim the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus; to institute and maintain actions of any kind in the courts of the State; to take, hold and dispose of property, either real or personal; and an exemption from higher taxes or impositions than are paid by the other citizens of the State.” That is, you can't charge Massachussetts clam diggers higher taxes in NJ than you charge NJ clam diggers, nor can you forbid them to come to NJ and dig clams.
It is very emphatic that other benefits were held not to be protected privileges and immunities. If your scenario were valid, I would simply go to New York and DEMAND that they honor my North Carolina concealed carry permit. I cannot do so. One state cannot trump another state's sovereign rights to govern its people as it sees fit. Even the most liberal interpretation of Article IV, clause 1 cannot be stretched that far.