In Grayson v. Virginia, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state statute which prohibited non-residents from bringing suits in its courts was unconstitutional. The court reasoned that since all citizens of the United States are entitled to equal protection under the law, states cannot deny access to their courts based on residency status. This decision established an important precedent for protecting individuals’ rights against discrimination by state governments and has been cited as authority in numerous subsequent cases involving similar issues.

In Grayson v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that a state law which prohibited non-residents from suing in its courts was unconstitutional. The majority opinion held that such laws violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution, as well as other provisions protecting citizens' rights to access court systems regardless of their residency status. However, Justice Paterson dissented on this ruling, arguing that states had an inherent right to determine who could sue within their borders and thus should be allowed to pass laws restricting non-resident suits if they so chose. He argued further that allowing out-of-state plaintiffs would lead to increased litigation costs for defendants due to travel expenses associated with defending against these cases in distant jurisdictions; he also noted potential conflicts between different states' laws regarding jurisdiction over certain matters. Ultimately, Justice Paterson concluded by stating his belief that it was not up to the federal government or judiciary but rather each individual state's legislature alone whether or not it wished to allow non-residents access its courts through suit filing privileges.