McCarthy v. Philadelphia Civil Service Commission

Background

A Philadelphia firefighter with 16 years of service lost his job after he moved his permanent home to New Jersey. City rules and ordinances require municipal employees to be residents of Philadelphia. The worker sued, arguing those rules violated his federally protected right to travel and live in another State. Pennsylvania courts upheld the residency rule and the state high court denied review, so the case reached the United States Supreme Court.

Reasoning

The central question was whether a continuing city-residence rule prevents someone’s constitutional right to live in another State while keeping a city job. The Court distinguished earlier cases that dealt with durational residency limits for voting or welfare. Those prior decisions did not question a municipality’s power to require that current employees actually reside in the city while employed. The Court found no support in its prior cases for a constitutional right to remain employed by the city while living elsewhere and therefore affirmed the lower court’s judgment.

Real world impact

The decision means cities can enforce continuing-residence rules for their employees and may dismiss workers who move out of the city or State. Municipal governments retain authority to set residency rules for current employees. The ruling does not decide or overturn rules that apply only at the time of hiring or that set durational eligibility periods.

Dissents or concurrances

Three Justices said they would have noted probable jurisdiction and heard argument, signaling they thought the issue merited fuller review and that there was some disagreement about the proper course.