Free David

Higher Courts have ruled that Americans have a right to travel without drivers licenses or license plates

Americans have the inalienable right to use roadways unrestricted in any manner, as long as, they are not damaging or violating property or rights of others.

Traveling freely, going about one’s daily activities, is the exercise of a most basic right.

  • “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489.
  • “The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
  • “The right of the citizen or national to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

Americans have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction, and this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.

  • “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law.” Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
  • “The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right.” Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

Government, in requiring the people to obtain drivers licenses, and accepting vehicle inspections and DUI/DWI roadblocks without question — is restricting, and therefore violating, the people’s common law right to travel.

  • “Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void.” Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60
  • “The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice.” Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24
  • “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
  • “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.