The New Jersey Supreme Court held first that the ordinance did not violate the Dormant Commerce Clause because the city was acting as a market participant.

Rehnquist held that an out-of-state resident's interest in employment on public works contracts was "'fundamental' to the promotion of interstate harmony" and therefore protected by the clause.

However, Rehnquist went on to explain that the Privileges and Immunities Clause did not bar all potentially discriminatory acts by a state or political subdivision.

He rejected Rehnquist's assertion that discrimination based on municipal residence could not escape scrutiny under the Privileges and Immunities Clause because both in-state and out-of-state citizens could be equally harmed by such protectionist legislation.

Before those sessions were completed, the trade union and Camden city officials reached a settlement, prompting the dismissal of the case in March 1986.