Workmen's compensation awards, decrees of administrative tribunals rather than courts, present the question of how far the mandate of the full faith and credit clause should reach and whether the clause should bar a claimant from pursuing supplemental compensation in a second state. Recently, in Thomas v. Washington Gas Light Co., the Supreme Court decided that full faith and credit should not prevent a claimant from obtaining supplemental compensation. Professor Sterk criticizes the Court's analysis, demonstrating the Thomas Court's neglect of the federal interests that the clause should protect. After examining the clause and its policy underpinnings, Professor Sterk concludes that decisions of administrative tribunals should be entitled to the same full faith and credit that court judgments receive.