Travel Freedom: Interstate Travel Rights And Privileges

The right to travel between states in the US is a fundamental Constitutional right, despite not being explicitly stated in the Constitution. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution states that The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. This freedom of movement has been recognised by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right, allowing citizens to move freely between states, be treated equally in all states, and enjoy the same rights and benefits as other state citizens. This right has been upheld in various court cases, including Crandall v. Nevada in 1868, where the Supreme Court declared that a state cannot inhibit people from leaving by taxing them.

The right to enter one state and leave another

The freedom to move between states has been recognised as a fundamental Constitutional right since the circuit court ruling in Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823). In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the court defined freedom of movement as "the right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them".

The right to enter and leave states is not limited to citizens of the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This amendment protects the right of citizens to move freely between states, and it also extends to those who are not citizens, such as those visiting temporarily from another state.

The Supreme Court has also ruled that this right includes the right to be treated equally in all states, regardless of citizenship status. This means that new citizens or temporary visitors to a state should be treated similarly to longtime citizens of that state.

The right to be treated as a welcome visitor

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in defining and upholding this right. In the case of Saenz v. Roe (1999), Justice John Paul Stevens emphasised that the United States Constitution protects the right of citizens to be treated as welcome visitors when travelling between states. This protection falls under the "Privileges and Immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2 of the Constitution.

In conclusion, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor is a fundamental aspect of the freedom of movement in the United States. It ensures that citizens of one state can freely travel to and temporarily reside in another state without facing discrimination or being denied equal rights and privileges. The Supreme Court has consistently upheld this right, striking down state laws that infringe upon it and reinforcing the idea of a strong and united country where all citizens are treated equally, regardless of their state of residence.

The right to equal treatment for new citizens

The right to freely travel between states in the US is primarily governed by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution, which states:

> The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

The right to travel between states has been judicially recognised as a fundamental Constitutional right since the circuit court ruling in Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823). This freedom of movement was further defined in Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869) as the "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them".

The US Supreme Court has also ruled on the right to travel in Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999), where Justice John Paul Stevens held that the US Constitution protects three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states. The third aspect, which relates to the right to equal treatment for new citizens, states that those who become permanent residents of a state have the right to be treated equally to native-born citizens. This is protected by the 14th Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause.

Challenges to durational residency requirements, which require individuals to reside in a state for a specified period before accessing certain benefits, have been made under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. In 1999, the Court approved a doctrinal shift, determining that state laws distinguishing between citizens based on the length of their residency would be evaluated under the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment. This shift recognised the importance of protecting the rights of new citizens and ensuring they are treated equally, regardless of how long they have resided in a state.

The right to free movement by air

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in defining and protecting the right to free movement by air. In the case of Crandall v. Nevada (1868), the Court declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right, and therefore a state cannot inhibit people from leaving by taxing them. Additionally, in United States v. Wheeler (1920), the Court reiterated that the Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement. However, the Wheeler case had a significant impact by locating the right to travel in the Privileges and Immunities Clause, providing it with specific constitutional protection.

In conclusion, the right to free movement by air is a fundamental aspect of freedom of movement in the United States. It is protected by the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court, ensuring that US citizens can freely travel between states without restrictions or taxation. This right has had a significant impact on various state laws and continues to shape policies related to residency requirements and equal treatment of citizens across states.

The right to free movement by road

The Supreme Court has further clarified and upheld the right to free movement by road in several cases. In Crandall v. Nevada (1868), the Court declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right, and therefore, a state cannot impose taxes on individuals leaving the state. The Court reiterated this position in United States v. Wheeler (1920), reaffirming that the Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement.

In Paul v. Virginia (1869), the Court defined freedom of movement as "the right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." This case established the fundamental right of citizens to move freely between states by road without facing restrictions or discrimination based on their state of residence.

In conclusion, the right to free movement by road is a fundamental Constitutional right in the United States that allows citizens to move freely between states and ensures equal treatment across state lines. This right has been upheld and clarified through various Supreme Court cases, protecting the freedom of movement and ensuring a more unified nation.

Frequently asked questions