In the case of Reitz v. Mealey, Commissioner of Motor Vehicles in 1940, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a New York statute that required non-resident motorists involved in accidents within state borders to post security for potential damages violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause or Due Process Clause of the Constitution. The plaintiff, a Pennsylvania resident who had been involved in an accident while driving through New York, argued that he was unfairly discriminated against as an out-of-state driver because residents were not subject to similar requirements. However, the court ruled against him by upholding constitutionality of this law on grounds that it did not infrally violate either clause cited by plaintiff. It reasoned that states have legitimate interest in ensuring compensation for their citizens injured by non-residents and such laws are reasonable measures towards achieving this end without unduly burdening interstate travel.

In the dissenting opinion for Reitz v. Mealey, it was argued that the New York law in question violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by denying a driver's license to anyone who had not paid off judgments from previous motor vehicle accidents. The justice believed this law unfairly penalized individuals without considering their ability to pay these debts or whether they were at fault for causing an accident. Furthermore, he contended that driving is a necessary right for many people and should not be taken away as punishment for unrelated financial issues. He also criticized how arbitrary enforcement of this law could lead to unequal treatment among citizens based on their economic status rather than any actual wrongdoing while operating a motor vehicle.