The Slaughter-House Cases was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1872. The case involved the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans and the Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company. The Butchers' Benevolent Association argued that the Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company had been granted a monopoly over the slaughtering of animals in New Orleans, which violated the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition of involuntary servitude. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughter-House Company, holding that the Thirteenth Amendment did not apply to the case. The Court also held that the Fourteenth Amendment did not grant the federal government the power to regulate the activities of the states. This decision was seen as a major setback for civil rights advocates, as it limited the scope of the Thirteenth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment's protection of civil rights. The Slaughter-House Cases remain an important precedent in constitutional law, as it established the limits of the federal government's power to regulate the activities of the states.

In the Slaughter-House Cases, the Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans challenged a Louisiana law that granted exclusive rights to operate slaughterhouses in New Orleans to one company. The Supreme Court held that this law did not violate either the Privileges and Immunities Clause or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In his dissent, Justice Stephen Field argued that by granting exclusive privileges to one corporation, Louisiana had deprived citizens from other states of their right to pursue an occupation without discrimination. He further argued that such laws violated both clauses because they denied individuals equal protection under state laws and discriminated against those who were not residents of Louisiana with respect to their ability to engage in certain occupations within its borders.