Slaughter-House Cases (post 14th Amendment)
*rendered the privileges or immunities clauses of the 14th Amendment merely reiterates the same under Article IV § 2 and is ineffectual as a means of protecting individual rights from state abridgement
13th –abolished the institution of slavery and involuntary servitude (a restriction)
–    seeing a large surplus of cattle in TX, LA legislature gave a monopoly in the livestock landing and the slaughterhouse business for the city of New Orleans to the Crescent City Livestock Landing and Slaughter-House company. The law required the company to allow any person to slaughter animals in the slaughterhouse for a fixed fee. Butchers argued that the restriction and the allowance of a monopoly created involuntary servitude in violation of the 13th Amendment, deprived them of 5th Amendment due process rights, and 14th    Amendment equal protection
29

–    the new Amendments were created to eliminate the remnants of African slavery, , not to effect any fundamental change in the relations of the gov’t. 14th Amendment expressly was adopted to assure on that states would not “abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the US” (ie Negroes). Similarly, the EP and DP clauses were drawn to protect former slaves. No reading of the 13th Amendment can be used to prevent LA from exercising its police power to define particular privileges and immunities of its citizens. The 13th Amendment was meant to abolish involuntary servitude of people, not to property
–    the Privileges and Immunities Clause is limited to protect those fundamental rights: which belong of right to the citizens of all free govt’s and which have at all times been enjoyed by citizens of the several States which compose this Union
**very narrow interpretation**
-State X cannot deny to citizens of State “Y” those fundamental rights given to members of State “X”