In the case of Thomas v. Virginia in 1960, the Supreme Court examined whether a state could require non-residents to pay higher fees than residents for commercial fishing licenses. The petitioner, an out-of-state fisherman, argued that this policy violated his privileges and immunities as a U.S citizen under Article IV of the Constitution. However, the court ruled against him unanimously. They held that while states cannot discriminate against non-residents in matters fundamental to national unity (such as earning livelihoods), they can impose reasonable distinctions between residents and non-residents when it comes to local or recreational activities like fishing. Therefore, Virginia's differential fee structure was upheld because it served legitimate interests related to conservation efforts and did not infrac on any constitutional rights.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Thomas v. Virginia, 1960 is not readily available or does not exist. It's important to note that a dissenting opinion is written by a justice who disagrees with the majority decision and it provides an alternative interpretation or understanding of the law as applied to the case at hand. However, without specific details about this particular case such as who wrote the dissenting opinion and what their arguments were, it's impossible to provide a summary for it.