Fishing license holders are being encouraged to return to fishing for the first time in decades.
But the rules that govern the license holders’ livelihoods have changed dramatically.
A federal appeals court ruled on Monday that North Carolina had violated the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause by not giving equal protection to all fishing licenses.
The court ruled 5-2 that North Carolinians can be denied licenses because they have a history of violating the rules.
North Carolina is one of four states that use a quota system to determine how many people can fish per year, while the others are Ohio, Kentucky, and Michigan.
The North Carolina Fish and Wildlife Commission, which oversees fishing, says that since 2010, there have been more than 40,000 licenses denied because they were not current.
The decision was the latest to highlight the need for the courts to take a closer look at fishing licenses, which have become increasingly controversial.
Since 2000, the number of licenses that have been denied has more than tripled, with nearly 100,000 people having their fishing licenses revoked in that time, according to a 2013 study.
The U.K. and Ohio are among the states that have tightened up fishing regulations in recent years, according and a 2015 report from the British Columbia Center for Policy Alternatives.
In February, the U and E Courts of Appeal in the U of C decided to overturn a lower court’s decision that found that North Dakota’s fishing license rules violated equal protection.
The appeals court’s ruling, issued in the Southern District of North Carolina, said North Dakota does not have a quota requirement for fishing licenses and is in violation of the equal protection provision of the U-T and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U Constitution.
“It’s hard to overstate how frustrating and difficult it is for fishing license holders to return home after fishing in North Dakota,” said Michael Cote, senior attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights, a national reproductive justice organization.
“That’s why this case is so important.
It’s time for courts to look at what’s at stake when it comes to protecting the right to fish.”
The case comes as the North Dakota Legislature grapples with how to address the state’s soaring unemployment rate and how to better protect the livelihoods of its fishing industry.
The state has been trying to shore up its economy after years of underfunded projects and has struggled to meet environmental, safety, and safety-related mandates.
A year ago, North Dakota enacted a raft of fishing-related laws to try to keep the economy afloat.
But a number of new restrictions were imposed last year as the state struggles to keep pace with the global fishery.
Under the state law, fishers must wear a face mask and wear a helmet during the fishing season, as well as a ban on wearing a mask during the capture of a live fish.
The bill also requires that people caught in the water have their license revoked.
The ruling comes at a time when the U is trying to curb a sharp decline in the number and quality of North Dakota fish caught and sold, according for instance to a 2014 report by the National Fisheries Institute.
North Dakota had been a top seafood destination for the U, according the U’s report.
But now it has fallen to the bottom of the list.
It now ranks 32nd out of 50 states for the percentage of fish caught, behind only New York and Vermont.
The loss of the North Dakotans’ fishing industry has been a major factor in the decline in fish stocks in North Carolina.
The region, home to nearly half of the state, has been losing fish to other states due to global warming and habitat loss.
The fish are also being used in processed foods and as feed for livestock, according a report by a North Carolina-based group called North Carolina Coalition Against Hunger.
The report noted that many North Dakots who were once fishermen have left the industry and become low-wage agricultural workers.
The impact on fishing has also been significant.
Fishers in the region have had to find new work as they try to make ends meet.
They’ve had to go on disability, pay for child care, and put off buying a home or taking on another job because they can’t afford the rent, the report said.
“People don’t have the resources to buy a house.
They’re getting less food and that’s really hurting them,” said Rachel Cope, a local fisher and the director of the group North Carolina Fishers Alliance.
“The only way you can make ends meets is to work.”