We Are Change

  • Chapter List
  • Testimonials
  • Join Luke Unfiltered
  • Enter Luke Unfiltered
  • Members Area
  • Live Call-In Show
  • Luke Unfiltered Forum
  • Members Only Store
  • Apocalypse Survival Training
  • Travel & Escape Hacking
  • Change Media University
  • Member Support
  • Edit Your Profile

Select Page

U.S. Supreme Court Says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Roads

Posted by Jeffrey Phillips | Jul 21, 2015 |

U.S. Supreme Court Says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Roads

U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS

“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”

Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” –

Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”

Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .”

Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.”

Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.”

Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.”

Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.”

House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.

Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.”

Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 “A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159;

Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.”

-American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…” 10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.”

-International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’”

-City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ”

The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.”

Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;

Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.”

Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –

Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways… transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances.”

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.”

Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 “Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen.” Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 “RIGHT — A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.”

City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. “The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it.”

Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. “The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation.”

Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” –

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority.” Donnolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.”

(Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court,

Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’

Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. “Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases.” Id., at 197.

Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts.” Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. “a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is “not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.”Justice White, Hiibel “Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles.”

Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road.”

Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a “statute.” A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle.

Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 205; See also: Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31; Ward v. Meredith, 202 Ill. 66; Shinkle v. McCullough, 116 Ky. 960; Butler v. Cabe, 116 Ark. 26, 28-29. …automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354.

Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen.

Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246;

Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. “A soldier’s personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods[.]’

U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235” 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. “[I]t is a jury question whether … an automobile … is a motor vehicle[.]”

United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983). Other right to use an automobile cases: –

EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 –

TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 – WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 – CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 – THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 – U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966) –

GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) – CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6 –

SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) – CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978) Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Some citations may be paraphrased.

This article first appeared on SomeNextLevelShit.com and was authored by Jeffrey Phillips.

Sign up on lukeunfiltered.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com .

About The Author

Jeffrey Phillips

Jeffrey Phillips

Join we are change.

  • Facebook 572.5k Followers
  • X 466k Followers
  • YouTube 870k Followers
  • Instagrm 130k Followers

Take The Chill Pill

You have Successfully Subscribed!

  • Ethics & Leadership
  • Fact-Checking
  • Media Literacy
  • The Craig Newmark Center
  • Reporting & Editing
  • Ethics & Trust
  • Tech & Tools
  • Business & Work
  • Educators & Students
  • Training Catalog
  • Custom Teaching
  • For ACES Members
  • All Categories
  • Broadcast & Visual Journalism
  • Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
  • In-newsroom
  • Memphis, Tenn.
  • Minneapolis, Minn.
  • St. Petersburg, Fla.
  • Washington, D.C.
  • Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
  • Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
  • Ethics & Trust Articles
  • Get Ethics Advice
  • Fact-Checking Articles
  • International Fact-Checking Day
  • Teen Fact-Checking Network
  • International
  • Media Literacy Training
  • MediaWise Resources
  • Ambassadors
  • MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

Amid proposals for travel vaccine mandates, is there a right to unfettered travel in the US?

Legal experts say the constitution generally recognizes a right to travel between the states. but it’s not an absolute right..

right to travel 2009

With President Joe Biden moving to tighten vaccine requirements, some Republicans have pushed back, arguing that Biden’s policies unduly constrain personal liberty.

During a Sept. 16  interview  on the conservative channel Newsmax, Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., focused on the prospect that Biden could make vaccination a requirement for interstate travel, such as on a plane. (Biden has not issued such an order, though one of his first acts as president was requiring masks for interstate travel.)

“This is a medical apartheid plain and simple,” Cawthorn said, adding, “They want to start shutting down air travel to these people to get around the country? I think that’s actually a constitutional violation, because you actually have a constitutionally protected right to free, unrestricted travel within the United States of America.”

Legal experts say Cawthorn is right that the Constitution recognizes a general right to travel between the states. However, they added that this right is traditionally balanced against other, competing rights — including public health and safety needs — and those other rights are often granted greater deference in the courts. (Cawthorn’s office did not respond to an inquiry.)

“There is a constitutional ‘right to travel,’ but it isn’t absolute,” said Wendy E. Parmet, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law and Northeastern University.

On one hand, several portions of the Constitution are generally considered to support freedom of travel between the states,  said  Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor. They include the  Privileges and Immunities Clause  — which says that “the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states” — as well as a related provision in the  14th Amendment .

On the other hand, Volokh and every other legal analyst we contacted agreed that this right is not unlimited.

While the Supreme Court “has recognized a right to interstate travel” in such cases as  Saenz v. Roe  from 1999, “it’s not an unfettered right,” said Jonathan H. Adler, a Case Western Reserve University law professor. “The regulation of interstate travel — think Transportation Security Administration measures — don’t necessarily infringe upon that right.”

Indeed, the TSA, a federal agency created in the aftermath of 9/11, has  myriad restrictions  on what passengers can bring aboard a domestic flight, from alcoholic beverages over 140 proof to ammunition to axes. And those are just the items beginning with the letter A. (These rules even apply to flights within a state.)

The TSA also requires a valid form of identification, an X-ray scan of both checked and carry-on bags, and a scan of passengers by a metal detector, all in the name of public safety. Together, these conditions make travel anything but “free” and “unrestricted,” yet they are constitutionally protected practices.

The federal regulatory role of interstate travel springs from the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which  gives  Congress the power “to regulate commerce … among the several states.”

“Since interstate travel is an area where states might not be able to cooperate and might discriminate against residents of other states, the power over interstate travel is in some ways given to the federal government,” said Kermit Roosevelt, a University of Pennsylvania law professor.

Public health concerns have long been considered an area where the federal government can legitimately exercise its power over interstate travel, legal analysts said.

For instance, the Supreme Court decided in the 1877 case  Railroad Co. v. Husen  that a state “may exclude from its limits persons afflicted by contagious or infectious diseases.”

That said, rulings in recent pandemic-related cases suggest that the courts, and especially conservative judges, are less likely than in the past to embrace a public-health justification for new government regulation. So it’s unclear whether today’s courts would uphold a vaccine mandate as a condition for interstate travel.

Such a policy “is untested,” Parmet said. “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention arguably has such authority, but neither the Public Health Services Act nor CDC regulations are spot on, and courts might well say it doesn’t.”

At the very least, a vaccine requirement for interstate travel might need to have certain exceptions, such as religious and medical exemptions, Adler said. “It’s hard to know whether a specific measure would likely be upheld without seeing the particulars,” he said.

Still, Ilya Somin, a George Mason University law professor who supports limits on federal power, acknowledged that there’s a strong legal case for requiring COVID-19 vaccines for travel on public-health grounds. Striking down such a mandate for plane travel would require a major reversal of longstanding interpretations by the courts, he said.

This article was originally  published by PolitiFact , which is part of the Poynter Institute. It is republished here with permission. See the sources here and more from PolitiFact here .

right to travel 2009

Opinion | O.J. Simpson, whose murder trial reshaped the media, dies at 76

Simpson’s trial lured a nation to its TVs, launched a network, created enduring ethics case studies and led to numerous career breakouts.

right to travel 2009

A fact-checker’s guide to Trump’s first criminal trial: business records, hush money and a gag order

Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels.

right to travel 2009

Grant applications now open to support reporting on transgender issues

The Gill Foundation has partnered with Poynter’s Beat Academy to train local journalists to serve as accurate, authoritative voices 

right to travel 2009

Opinion | Republican lawmaker crushes Tucker Carlson with surprisingly legitimate commentary

Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw blasted the former Fox News host for being a ‘click-chaser’ in a capable rant on X.

right to travel 2009

Donald Trump said all legal scholars, ‘on both sides,’ wanted federal abortion law overturned. That’s wrong.

Roe v. Wade inspired legions of supporters and opponents. Before the 2022 ruling, numerous legal scholars urged the Supreme Court to uphold it.

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.

  • View Record

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/27432/critical-issues-in-transportation-for-2024-and-beyond

TRID the TRIS and ITRD database

The Right to Travel: A Fundamental Right of Citizenship

The right to travel within the United States is a fundamental right, existing before the creation of the United States and appearing in the Articles of Confederation. The right to travel is recognized and protected by the U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court. This travel right entails privacy, leaving citizens free to travel interstate without government interference and intrusion. In the post-hijacking surveillance society, the imposition of official photo identification for travel, watch-list prescreening programs, and airport screening and search methods unreasonably burden the right to travel. They undermine citizens' rights to travel and privacy. These regulations impermissibly require citizens to relinquish one fundamental right of privacy in order to exercise another fundamental right of travel. The original conception of travel rights embodies the right as a broadly-based one that encompasses all modes of transportation. Its explicit articulation in the Articles of Confederation remains implicit in the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Contrary to arguments in the appellate single mode doctrine, if any mode of travel is abridged, then citizens' constitutionally enshrined right to travel is violated. The Supreme court needs to articulate an originally consistent and politically robust doctrine of the multi-modal right to travel.

  • Find a library where document is available. Order URL: http://worldcat.org/oclc/31144651
  • Sobel, Richard
  • Torres, Ramon L
  • Publication Date: 2013
  • Media Type: Print
  • Features: References;
  • Pagination: pp 13-47
  • Journal of Transportation Law, Logistics and Policy
  • Issue Number: 1
  • Publisher: Association for Transportation Law, Logistics and Policy
  • ISSN: 1078-5906
  • Serial URL: http://www.atlp.org/journal.html

Subject/Index Terms

  • TRT Terms: Air travel ; Interstate transportation ; Legal rights ; Passenger handling ; Privacy ; Travel ; Travel modes
  • Geographic Terms: United States
  • Subject Areas: Aviation; Law; Passenger Transportation; I10: Economics and Administration;

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01489821
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: Aug 15 2013 9:13AM

right to travel 2009

american history

  • the constitutionally repugnant reconstruction acts imposed the 14th amendment via martial law powers in time of peace
  • free at last
  • america - some assembly required
  • understanding the new world order
  • quick start guide
  • There is No "Fourteenth Amendment"!

three constitutions

  • three constitutions (this article in development)

correct your status

  • correcting your political status
  • a call to action that can no longer wait
  • 1779 vs. 928s
  • Declaration of Political Status
  • the truth about the irs
  • global sovereign's handbook

driving and traveling

Right to travel without a license.

  • the twelve presumptions of court
  • judicial notice / demand for rights
  • 18 U.S. Code § 241 - conspiracy against rights
  • 18 U.S. Code § 242 - deprivation of rights under color of law

reconstruction

  • who and what is the state assembly
  • who controls whom
  • structure of the original government to be reconstructed
  • the american government
  • the jural assembly handbook

corporate documents

  • Hospitals and Physicians Handbook on Birth Registration and Fetal Death Reporting

the academy

Correct your status: 101.

  • Articles coming soon

reconstruction: 101

  • CRACKING THE CODE

state enactments

Florida state enactments, 3.4 out of 5 stars, u.s. supreme court says no license necessary to drive automobile on public roads.

“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”

Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” –

Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”

Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .”

Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.”

Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.”

Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.”

Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.”

House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.

Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.”

Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 “A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159;

Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.”

-American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…” 10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.”

-International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’”

-City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ”

The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.”

Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;

Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.”

Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –

Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways… transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances.”

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.”

Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 “Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen.” Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 “RIGHT — A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.”

City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. “The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it.”

Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. “The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation.”

Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” –

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority.” Donnolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.”

(Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court,

Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’

Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. “Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases.” Id., at 197.

Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts.” Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. “a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is “not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.”Justice White, Hiibel “Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles.”

Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road.”

Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a “statute.” A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle.

Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.

Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 205; See also: Christy v. Elliot, 216 Ill. 31; Ward v. Meredith, 202 Ill. 66; Shinkle v. McCullough, 116 Ky. 960; Butler v. Cabe, 116 Ark. 26, 28-29. …automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354.

Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen.

Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246;

Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. “A soldier’s personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods[.]’

U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235” 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. “[I]t is a jury question whether … an automobile … is a motor vehicle[.]”

United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983). Other right to use an automobile cases: –

EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 –

TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 – WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 – CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 – THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 – U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966) –

GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) – CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6 –

SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) – CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978)

Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Some citations may be paraphrased.

How can we improve this article?

Please submit the reason for your vote so that we can improve the article..

The Golden Rules of Retirement Travel

By Stacey Lastoe

Image may contain Clothing Glove Person Footwear Shoe Adult Animal Canine Dog Mammal Pet Accessories and Glasses

This is part of a collection of stories celebrating the many shapes retirement travel can take. Read more here.

Bonni and Bob Gumport travel regularly in their retirement. Not beholden to one short vacation a year (they average seven big ones), their compounding experience has allowed them to develop a code of rules by which they abide— tips and tricks to use wherever they go. After one too many of the small rooms common in boutique hotels, for example, they’ve cut them out entirely. Also out of the question are walking tours within two days of arrival in a new destination, as they prefer to settle in. Their daughter Lauren describes them as “pros on retiree travel,” but they are not the only ones with advice to give.

There are former museum curators who have learned not to overbook themselves; solo travelers who always learn a little of the local language. Adherence to anyone’s rules will never ensure a vacation free of hiccups, where no flight is ever delayed , every tour is worth the hours put in, and every meal sublime . But learning from others may improve your chances of a good time—even when things inevitably go sideways. We’ve spoken to over 20 retired travelers to hear how their Golden Years have informed the way that they travel. Below, find some of their savviest secrets for better trips.

1. Take a ride on the hop-on, hop-off bus tour

If she’s traveling in a city that offers one of those double-decker hop-on, hop-off sightseeing tours, Denver -based Heidi Burtoni, 65, who goes on multiple trips per year, is definitely stepping aboard. Burtoni says it’s a great way to figure out the rest of her itinerary, get tips from other travelers and the tour guide, and get a feel for the new city. “It’s the first thing I do to get the lay of the land,” says Burtoni. Her previous career in sales means the frequent solo traveler will “talk to anybody,” so these tours also open the door for socializing and making connections.

Image may contain Adult Person Clothing Pants Face Head Book Comics Publication Footwear and Shoe

Know what to skip—“whether that means avoiding tourist traps, the most sweltering hours at fairs, or not putting yourself in danger by flagging a taxi when it's unsafe," says Lynn Zelevansky.

2. Figure out what to avoid

For Paul and Lynn Zelevansky (77 and 76, respectively), travel is less about hitting all the top spots and more about learning where not to go, “whether that means avoiding tourist traps, the most sweltering hours at fairs, or not putting yourself in danger by flagging a taxi when it’s unsafe.” They visit the Venice Biennale in fall, now, rather than at the opening, to avoid the worst of the crushes—it also helps them more effectively skirt the city's infamous pickpockets (Lynn's wallet was stolen on a crowded vaporetto ferry in 2022).

3. BYOTP (Bring Your Own Toilet Paper)

“Toilet paper in Europe is very scratchy … not good for sensitive parts,” says Florida native Karen Butera, an avid pickleball player who often travels with the sport in mind. Whenever overseas, she always travels with her own toilet paper. Butera, 66, is taking her granddaughter to see Taylor Swift in Paris this summer, and, yes, she will be packing TP—creature comforts are even more crucial on the road than they are at home.

4. Don’t overschedule

Packed-to-the-brim itineraries used to be J. Patrice Marandel’s MO, but these days, the former chief curator at Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) is more keen on scheduling “plenty of time for the unexpected.” Gone are the nonstop days with planned breakfasts, lunches, and dinners; instead, Marandel, 79, leaves room for the possibility of something unexpected and “exciting.” It often pays off.

Image may contain: Adult, Person, Book, Comics, Publication, Accessories, Formal Wear, Tie, Clothing, Footwear, and Shoe

5. Pack light

Buffalo, New York-based Lisa LaLonde, 74, and her travel companion Antoinette Judelsohn, 70, whom she’s been traveling with for over a decade, are pros at packing light . The pals can manage for a month on very little, relying on the versatility of black leggings and black tops, says LaLonde. The trick? Develop a travel uniform, bring just a few versions, and wash undergarments as necessary, says Judelsohn. Big suitcases stuffed to the brim with a ton of different outfits are more of a hassle than a luxury. “They’re a pain in the neck if you’re getting on a train or off a train … or moving from one city to another,” says LaLonde.

Image may contain Person Sitting Adult Accessories Sunglasses Art Face Head Clothing Footwear Shoe and Drawing

“Anybody and their brother with an RV travels on Sunday,” warns Jenelle Jones.

6. Don't get (too) excited

Judelsohn, a former teacher who met LaLonde when they worked together at the same school in Buffalo, has another travel rule that’s served her well: Letting go of expectations. “I never get excited about a trip,” says Judelsohn. Instead, the savvy traveler lets the excitement emerge based on what's in front of her in the moment.

7. Avoid traveling on Sundays

RVer Jenelle Jones, 64, is against traveling on Sundays. As she puts it, “anybody and their brother with an RV travels on Sunday.” Long weekend RVers who have to get back for work on Monday use Sundays to head home, so retired Jones, 64, simply avoids the day altogether. It's also, according to her, the “biggest day to get in an RV wreck”— yet another reason to sit back and relax. You have nowhere you need to be, after all. Take advantage.

8. Learn a few words of the local language

Charlotte Simpson , whose blog Traveling Black Widow documents her travels (100 countries and counting so far), says her number one travel rule is to learn a few key phrases—hello, goodbye, please, thank you—in the dominant language of the places she visits. Simpson says her efforts are always well received. “I just find, inevitably, it sort of stuns people when I even just say good morning.” Simpson, who prefers not to reveal her age, says she gets a lot out of bridging the language gap with just a few words: “It just makes people so friendly and so happy that you took this moment to learn [their language].”

Image may contain: Pickup Truck, Transportation, Truck, Vehicle, Clothing, Glove, Adult, Person, Camping, and Outdoors

9. Travel slower

When you cram too much into a single trip, “the whole experience just kind of becomes a blur,” say Gillian Batt, 43, and Stephanie Myers, 51, whose blog Our Freedom Years documents their early retirement and subsequent travels. The couple, who hail from Ontario, Canada, say staying in one place for an extended period of time helps them avoid travel burnout, keep costs low, and enjoy the whole experience more. All that rushing around on limited PTO? Well behind them.

Image may contain Clothing Hat Pants Adult Person Animal Canine Dog Mammal Pet Photography Coat and Jacket

For RVers like Norm, keeping things flexible is key.

10. Go your own way

The pandemic crystallized things for Kim Kelly Stamp , 65, and her wife Liz Schick, 62, who left it all behind and decided to travel around the country in a red 21-foot teardrop trailer. They’ve since gotten really good at going with the flow. “We know where we’re going to stay along the way, but we hold that really loosely and give ourselves the opportunity to make something else happen,” explains Stamp. This approach led them to Laurel, Mississippi, where the HGTV show Hometown —of which Stamp and Schick are big fans of, is based. Instead of following a regimented schedule, they followed their passion when the road forked, literally.

11. Keep an open heart and mind

In spite of being seasoned travelers, John and Bev Martin, 60, who started the RetirementTravelers site to share their journey with others, admit they still need to remind themselves that they can’t control everything. “We have to be patient and receptive to the lessons the world is trying to teach,” says the couple. One that keeps coming up? “Retirement is not the time to stop dreaming about new and different routes in life.”

Image may contain: Clothing, Footwear, Shoe, Person, Hat, and Cup

12. Do your research

The Gumports appreciate getting a taste of the local culture wherever they are traveling, and they’re not opposed to tours or experiences that deliver on this front. But Bonni has a few words of advice: “If you’re looking at purchasing something that uses words such as ‘bespoke, artisanal, farm-to-table’ and more fluffy adjectives, make sure these experiences are as authentic as they sound.” Read reviews thoroughly and take the time to research before you buy, advises Bonni. It's fun to be spontaneous, but it's easy to be misled by clever marketing and buzzwords.

13. It’s a marathon—not a sprint

It wasn’t long before Brenda Huyhn adopted—and adapted— a popular van-lifer rule: Don’t travel more than 3 hours, get in by 3 p.m., and stay at least 3 nights. Huyhn, who at 47 retired earlier than many, is adamant about not trying to do too much in one day to avoid burnout. She and her husband take their time, prioritizing “quality over quantity” with their stops and stays. It makes the entire experience all the richer.

Image may contain: Clothing, Glove, Nature, Outdoors, Footwear, Shoe, Child, Person, Adult, Accessories, Glasses, and Snow

14. You can always head home

Diana Petterson is on track to hit the 100-country mark just in time for her 70th birthday in 2026. But as much as the Black solo traveler loves seeing the world, she’s not afraid to ditch a trip if something isn’t working out. “Wherever I am in the world, if for whatever reason I am uncomfortable, or I don't feel well … I’m going to plop down that credit card , and get home.”

15. Start the day early to avoid the crowds

Artist Simma Liebman, 76, enjoys going to museums while visiting new cities and places. But since the retiree is immunocompromised, she plans these outings a little differently. Now Liebman hits the museums “as early in the day as possible” and masks up while taking in the art "unless there are very few people inside.” Whatever your motivation, rising early is something you can be sure the hordes of 20-something backpackers won't be doing. Beat them to all the best spots.

Image may contain Clothing Coat Jacket Adult Person Standing Long Sleeve Sleeve Photography Blazer Face and Head

“I like a very good hotel, but not necessarily the best,” says Betty. Focus on getting the right location.

16. Base yourself strategically

Betty, 80, an art collector who declined to share her last name, has found that mid-sized hotels (meaning about 200 rooms) in central locations, with just enough of the services she wants and needs, do the job. “I like a very good hotel, but not necessarily the best,” says Betty. As long as you have the basics covered, it's really about location, location, location.

17. Don’t wait for tomorrow

Instead of putting off travel for a later date, Chicago -based Ruthie Maldonado-Delwiche advises those interested in exploring the world to get out there and “do it now.” Because “tomorrow isn’t promised,” Maldonado-Delwiche, who’s been traveling since she retired in 2017, says. Don't wait if there’s something you want to do or a place you want to visit.

Former psychiatrist Ann Heaslett, 60, who aims to run the six major world marathons in her retirement, feels exactly the same way. “There’s no time like the present.”

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions ), our Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement and to receive marketing and account-related emails from Traveller. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Home

  • LegiScan API
  • Bill Tracking

Bill Text: GA HB875 | 2009-2010 | Regular Session | Prefiled

Georgia house bill 875 ( prior session legislation ), legiscan search.

View Top 50 Searches

LegiScan Info

  • 2024 Schedules
  • Weekly Datasets
  • Documentation
  • Search Help
  • Voter Registration
  • Governor Deadlines & Effective Dates
  • Legislation 101
  • On Bill Numbers
  • State Support

LegiScan Trends

View Top 50 National

IMAGES

  1. Right To Travel

    right to travel 2009

  2. Right to travel abroad is a basic human right: SC

    right to travel 2009

  3. Right to Travel Under Constitution (Print on Demand)

    right to travel 2009

  4. AFFIDAVIT of Right to Travel Public

    right to travel 2009

  5. The Right to Travel (Chapter 5)

    right to travel 2009

  6. Defending Your Right to Travel

    right to travel 2009

VIDEO

  1. Why Travel Insurance is Essential for Your Trip

  2. Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel Full Movie Facts , Review And Knowledge / Anna Faris

  3. Фильм о туре "Путешествие на край света". Часть 2

  4. Cheapest International Flights us $500

  5. Don't Get Lost in Coverage

  6. Bazen yanlış oturursun , Best travel blogs, Amazon, Online Shopping, Entertainment

COMMENTS

  1. U.S. Supreme Court Says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On

    It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." - Thompson vs. Smith, supra.;

  2. PDF Supreme Court of the United States

    rights, i.e. the right to travel or the right to trial under the Common Law, can be converted into a privilege by the State, and/or denied to a citizen by the conversion of that right to a privilege. 2. There are numerous U.S. Supreme Court decisions affirming that a State may not convert a right to a privilege, and the Petitioner has

  3. Right to Travel and Privileges and Immunities Clause

    Footnotes Jump to essay-1 See, e.g., Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418, 430 (1870) ([The Privileges and Immunities] clause plainly and unmistakably secures and protects the right of a citizen of one State to pass into any other State of the Union . . . .); Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168, 180 (1868) (stating that the Privileges and Immunities Clause includes the right of free ingress into other ...

  4. Freedom of movement under United States law

    In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." [1] However, the Supreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the ...

  5. PDF The Right to Travel

    A right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage or favor. Public Road. A road way existing for the free and unrestricted use of all common people, is a public road. Heninger v. Peery 47 S.E. 1013, 102 Va. 896 Register. From L. regesta, neuter pl. of regestus, pp. of regerere "to record", literally, "to carry back," from

  6. Interstate Travel as a Fundamental Right

    The doctrine of the right to travel actually encompasses three separate rights, of which two have been notable for the uncertainty of their textual support. The first is the right of a citizen to move freely between states, a right venerable for its longevity, but still lacking a clear doctrinal basis. 1 Footnote Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999).

  7. Right to Travel and Privileges and Immunities Clause

    It protects [1] the right of a citizen of one State to enter and to leave another State, [2] the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second State, and, [3] for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, the right to be treated like other citizens of that State.4 Footnote 526 U.S. 489, 500 (1999) (numbering added).

  8. Right to Travel and Privileges and Immunities Clause

    Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1:. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The Supreme Court has long recognized the right to travel from one state to another under the Privileges and Immunities Clause, 1 Footnote See, e.g., Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 4 1 8, 430 (1 8 70) ([The Privileges and Immunities] clause plainly and ...

  9. Interstate Travel

    The doctrine of the "right to travel" actually encompasses three separate rights, of which two have been notable for the uncertainty of their textual support. The first is the right of a citizen to move freely between states, a right venerable for its longevity, but still lacking a clear doctrinal basis. 1.

  10. The Right To Travel And Privacy: Intersecting Fundamental Freedoms, 30

    2014] RIGHT TO TRAVEL AND PRIVACY 641 . of governmental requirements, such as official photo identification for travel, watch-list prescreening programs, no-fly lists, and intrusive air-port scanning and searches, unreasonably burden the right to travel in privacy. This Article traces the development of the travel right from its ro-

  11. Right to Travel: Statutes, Codes & Regulations Are Not Law

    Common Law Right to Travel: 1."The RIGHT TO TRAVEL is an unconditional personal right whose exercise may NOT be conditioned." - Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 92 S Ct 995, 31 L Ed 2d 274. [5 U.S. Dig, Constitutional Law, and 101.5, Right of interstate of international travel.] 2.

  12. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

    fect of imposing a penalty on the right to travel violates the Equal Protection Clause absent a compelling governmental interest. Pp. 8-10. (b) The right to travel embraces three different components: the right to enter and leave another State; the right to be treated as a welcome visitor while temporarily present in another State; and, for

  13. Amid proposals for travel vaccine mandates, is there a right to

    "There is a constitutional 'right to travel,' but it isn't absolute," said Wendy E. Parmet, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law and Northeastern University.

  14. The Right to Travel: A Fundamental Right of Citizenship

    The right to travel is recognized and protected by the U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court. This travel right entails privacy, leaving citizens free to travel interstate without government interference and intrusion. In the post-hijacking surveillance society, the imposition of official photo identification for travel, watch-list ...

  15. What Is the Right to Travel?

    The right to travel doesn't mean you can drive without a valid driver's license and proper vehicle registration. Public safety can override individual freedoms in some contexts, like driving. Roads and highways are public infrastructure. Dangerous driving has the potential to harm others and their property. Travel is a right, but driving is a ...

  16. Driver Licensing vs. the Right to Travel

    The forgotten legal maxim is that free people have a right to travel on the roads which are provided by their servants for that purpose, using ordinary transportation of the day. Licensing cannot be required of free people, because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of a right.

  17. H.Res.1212

    Shown Here: Introduced in House (06/28/2022) This resolution expresses the sense that every person has the right to travel freely within the United States and that no one should be held criminally or civilly liable for seeking, providing, or assisting with out-of-state health care services that are legal in the jurisdiction in which they are delivered.

  18. PDF LENGTH: Orphaned Right to Travel

    right to travel. n32 In fact, the right to travel without undue restriction was the very first right recognized as a fundamental liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. n33 The right to travel meant travel by virtually any means available, or at least any ordinary or usual means.

  19. Right to Travel and Privileges and Immunities Clause

    Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1:. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The Supreme Court has long recognized the right to travel from one state to another under the Privileges and Immunities Clause, 1 Footnote See, e.g., Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418, 4 3 0 (1870) ([The Privileges and Immunities] clause plainly and ...

  20. Bill Text: GA HB875

    2009 GA HB875 (Text) Right to Travel Act; enact. It shall be lawful to any person, for the future, to go out of our kingdom, and to return, safely and securely, by land or by water, saving his allegiance to us, unless it be in time of war, for some short space, for the common good of the kingdom: excepting prisoners and outlaws, according to the laws of the land, and of the people of the ...

  21. Right to Travel Abroad and Substantive Due Process

    The Court held that Section 6 too broadly and indiscriminately restrict[ed] the right to travel and thereby abridge[d] the liberty guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. 4 Footnote Id. at 505 . However, the Court has acknowledged that the federal government may restrict citizens' travel abroad to particular areas of the world for national ...

  22. right to travel without a license

    It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." - Thompson vs. Smith, supra.;

  23. The Golden Rules of Retirement Travel

    13. It's a marathon—not a sprint. It wasn't long before Brenda Huyhn adopted—and adapted— a popular van-lifer rule: Don't travel more than 3 hours, get in by 3 p.m., and stay at least ...

  24. Bill Text: GA HB875

    2009 GA HB875 (Text) Right to Travel Act; enact. It shall be lawful to any person, for the future, to go out of our kingdom, and to return, safely and securely, by land or by water, saving his allegiance to us, unless it be in time of war, for some short space, for the common good of the kingdom: excepting prisoners and outlaws, according to the laws of the land, and of the people of the ...

  25. Right to Travel and Privileges and Immunities Clause

    Saenz connected the third component of the right to travel to the Fourteenth Amendment 's Privileges or Immunities Clause. 7 Footnote Id. at 502-03 (citing U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1). The Commerce Clause is another potential textual basis for the right to travel. See Guest, 383 U.S. at 758 (citing Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160, 173 ...