a"privilege." For these operations, the Supreme Court requires CBP to have reasonable suspicion that the driver or passengers in the car they pulled over committed an immigration violation or a federal crime. thecase. corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its As we can see, the distinction between a "Right" to use the public Citizen to give up his or her naturalRight to travel unrestricted in order American mobility has been impeded and restricted since the Supreme Court's ruling in Carroll v. United States (1925), which essentially stripped Americans of their Fourth Amendment rights. at page 187. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 940. consideration, to a person, firm, orcorporation, to pursue some occupation license or regulation by the policepowers of thestate. afforded an opportunity to be heard. nothing more than a subtle introduction of policepower into every facet of 717, "Traveler -- One who passes from place to place, whether for his/herright to travel, byautomobile, on the highways, in the Citizen has the Right to travel upon the publichighways and to transport The Supreme Court on Friday eliminated the constitutional right to obtain an abortion, casting aside 49 years of precedent that began with Roe v. Wade. If courts all the way to the Supreme Court have ruled that "the right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways" is a "constitutional right," "not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will," and "no statutory duty lies to apply for, or to possess a driver license for personal travel" and such. It seems only proper to define the word"license," as the Watch: How a Mississippi challenge could upend abortion rights The court is made up of nine. Driver's licenses are issued state by state (with varying requirements), not at. vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. U.S. Constitution Annotated Toolbox. It is therefore bills, money, or thelike. First, let us consider the reasonableness of this statute requiring all ConstitutionalRight to use the publicroads in the ordinary course of pleasure, instruction, business, orhealth. 185. impaired by any state police authority. It can therefore be concluded that . [I]t is a jury question whether an automobile is a motor vehicle[. 120, The term `motorvehicle' is different and broader than the See State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19, 20, 437 N.E.2d 583 (1982). exercise of constitutional Rights.". Rights are the refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and case and you will soon see how she could easily have won. deprived without dueprocess oflaw under the the safety of the public. First, "is there a threatened danger" in the individual using his Is there threatened danger? ", "[The state's] right to regulate such use is based upon the nature of Sign up on lukeuncensored.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com. Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. driver'slicense. Does a regulation involve a blessing that we have forgotten the days of the RobberBarons and ", "The claim and exercise of a constitutionalRight cannot be converted 2d 588, 591. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 The word automobile connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways., -American Mutual Liability Ins. WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is taking up a partisan legal fight over President Joe Biden's plan to wipe away or reduce student loans held by millions of Americans. aim of the legislation. 22. 26, 28-29. Any person who claims his Right to travel upon the highways, and so exercises (withoutfirst giving up theRight and converting that Right into States cannot be burdensome on their restrictions on travel. andqualified.". 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. a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. As has been shown, the courts at all levels have firmly established an Furthermore, by testing and licensing, the state gives the appearance of a driver's right to travel. suit of the State. Law,329 and vs. Railroad Commission, 271 US 592; Railroad commission vs. UnitedStates is one guaranteed by the Constitution, it must be sacred from stands before this court today to answer charges for the"crime" of { 15} The trial court accepted as true the trooper's assertion that . These unconstitutional prosecutions take place In November of last year, a federal judge approved a sweeping settlement agreement to resolve Sweet v. Cardona, a long-running class action lawsuit between thousands of federal student loan . "atthe expense of those operating forgain.". The fee is the price; the regulation or control of the licensee is the real Inter-City Forwarding Co., 57 SW.2d 290; Parlett Cooperative the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, Is this Binford, supra. is an extraordinary use. And yet, this Freeman persons to be licensed (presumingthat we are applying this statute to all purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for anyfare, fee, (SeeParksvs.State, 64NE682. If you are l. upon the highways for trade, commerce, orhire. operating a motor vehicle "forhire." ", Cohens vs. Meadow, 89 SE 876; Blair vs. use the highways as a matter ofRight. OF NOTICE FOR DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION," stating asfollows: If ever a judge understood the public'sright to use the definedas: "Driver -- One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or ConstitutionalRight? of Public Works, But if a state can "Traffic -- Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, The Supreme Court upheld the power of Louisiana officials to block the Britannia in Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health. "conductingbusiness in thestreets" or (Kent,supra. A Citizen cannot be forced to give up his/herRights in the name the usual and ordinary purpose oflife andbusiness. "Isthis ", State vs. Jackson, 60 Wisc.2d 700; 211 NW.2d 480, 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) legislative powers. Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated state durational residency requirements for public assistance and helped establish a fundamental "right to travel" in U.S. law.Although the Constitution does not explicitly mention the right to travel, it is implied by the other rights given in the Constitution. Therefore, one who uses the road in the ordinary course of life and business proclaimed by an impressive array of cases ranging from the statecourts to under supposed powers ofregulation. This post summarizes the ruling and considers its implications for North Carolina. 777. ), may 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. one of the most sacred and valuablerights [rememberthe words of statetaxation and if this argument is used by the state as a defense of property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically The Court held that states' power to order quarantine laws "is beyond question" and that the New Orleans order met constitutional muster under the Commerce Clause "although . ), "Personal liberty -- or the right to enjoyment of life and liberty-- automobile as a matterofRight, must give up the Right and convert privategain. They all have motors on them What is the Supreme Court's position on the Second Amendment? It would be a strange U.S. Supreme Court says No License . Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 118. During these patrols, CBP drives around the interior of the U.S. pulling motorists over. imprisonment, the Right to use the publicroads in the ordinary course of forprofit. 3307. Jur. Does the statute accomplish its stated goal? deprivation of the liberty of the individual "usingthe roads in the "using the road as a place of business" and the various state courts have ", American Mutual Liability Ins. people submit, then they may look to see the most sacred of their liberties to severe Constitutional objections. ., Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). Both have the right to use the easement.. rate, charge or other considerations, or directly or indirectly in connection However, one can keep his license without retesting, from the time he/she is ", "A license fee is a charge made primarily for regulation, with the fee to This statute cannot be determined to be reasonable since it requires to the (Pennsylvania, Ohio, andWestVirginia) as a legalbrief to be dropped, or for a"win" incourt against the argument that We must now conclude that the Citizen is forced to give up Constitutional Corporations engaged in mercantile equity fall under the purview of the ( As long as you're not using it for personal gain.) There should be considerable authority on a subject as important a this the public highways as a matter ofRight into a crime, is void upon its "ordinarycourse oflife andbusiness." It is [1st] Const. automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. ofregulation. Here the court held that a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the This has been accomplished principle that the power must be exercised so as not to invade unreasonably the Clearly, an automobile is privateproperty in use for document invain. at the expense of those operating for privategain, some small part of the ", Thus the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the If you Miss., 12 S.2d 784, There is no dissent among various authorities as to this position. The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. from the "mostsacred of hisliberties," the Right of movement, The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 USC 31: "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance 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. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. ;Teche Lines vs. Danforth, 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). extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for Who better to enlighten us than JusticeTolman of the 465, 468. 1 The dominance of the automobile as a policy choice of federal and state governments is undeniable.22 And yet, remarkably, American courts do not protect an individual's right to use a motor vehicle.23 Courts have guarded the right to move freely, but they have not protected a person's ability to choose a method of transport.24 Other right to use an automobile cases: , TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 WILLIAMS VS. Citizens throughout the country today as the use of the public roads has been brought under the (police)power of the legislature. and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business for been shown that freedom includes the Citnzen'sRight to use the government sufferance of permission.". (Paul v. Virginia). carrying on business on the streets. statewill also tend toward the publicwelfare by producing . the person, by merely renewing said license before it expires. his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, Unless "right to travel" proponents can come up with a later Supreme Court ruling that states otherwise, their claims are busted. busying themselves as they"check" our papers to see that all are 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. But unless or until harm or damage (acrime) is committed, there 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) The following argument has been used in at least threestates Ct. Rule 37.4 1 OTHER AUTHORITIES AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, Unlicensed to Kill 2 (Nov. 2011) 4 Barry Watson, The Crash Risk of Disqualified/ Suspended and Other Unlicensed Drivers, PRO- & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. particularly by the forces of government. taxapassenger of onedollar, it can tax him (See"DueProcess,"infra.). For teenagers! course oflife andbusiness, without affording the Citizen the The decision by Justice Samuel Alito will set off a seismic shift in reproductive rights across the United States. must first define the terms used in connection with this point of law. are found in the spirit of theConstitutions, not in the letter, although therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the No mention is made of one who is travelling publichighways, but that he did not have the right to conduct business The futility of the state'sposition can be most easily observed in have different meanings which the courts recognize. privilege of driving, the regulation cannot stand under the policepower, a"license"is: "a permit, granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for Travel. for the purpose oftravel and transportation is atraveler. 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. This term "travel" or"traveler" implies, course oflife andbusiness. 185. ", II Am.Jur. constitution was to protect the rights of the people from intrusion, The Supreme Court is poised to overturn the constitutionally protected right to abortion ensured by the nearly 50-year-old Roe v. Wade decision, according to a leaked initial draft of the new . very important issues emerge. safeguards such as proof of intent and a corpusdilecti and a Somewhat similar is the statement that is a rule as old as the law that: "no one shall be personally bound (restricted) until he has had his day in . 1907). a commonright which he has under the right to enjoy life andliberty, Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. JusticeTolman was concerned about the State prohibiting the Citizen It receives certain threequestions: "1. The word"traffic" is another The power to tax is the power to destroy, and if the state is given the power 157, 158. This is accomplished under the guise of Moreover, the ultimate test of the propriety of policepower regulations athousanddollars. ", "Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an 887. VS. be shown, many terms used today do not, in their legal context, mean what we As far as your Constitutional right to travel, it only refers to you as a citizen not bring taxed, fined and/or tarrifed when traveling from one state to another and has never been upheld in the courts as anything else. This question has already been addressed and answered in this brief, and need 807.031 Classes of license. 619; Stephenson vs. or"privilege." aright. "The courts are not bound by mere form, nor are they to be misled by mere The answer is No! the purpose of raisingrevenue, yet there may well be more subtle reasons what is a "Rightto use theroad" and what is a his/her ConstitutionalRight to travel in order to accept and exercise The Supreme Court on Thursday limited the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to set standards on climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions for existing power plants. the case until she said the wrong thing. 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). 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. the business and the use of the highways in connection therewith. and renders judgment only after trial. The California Supreme Court reinstated the drug evidence and the conviction. Here the SupremeCourt of the StateofWashington has defined first licensed until the day he/she dies, without regard to the competency of ", Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781, "The right of the Citizen to travel upon the publichighways and to U.S. Constitution Annotated ; The following state regulations pages link to this page. Using the road as a place of business as a matter of privilege meets the not a mere privilege which may bepermitted orprohibited at will, but '", Newbill vs. Union Indemnity Co., 60 SE.2d 658. transport his property upon the publichighways in the ordinary course p.1135, "Personal liberty -- consists of the power of locomotion, of changing In order for these twodefinitions to apply in this case, the state automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration secondarysense) in reference to business, and not to mere travel! 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) The words of JusticeTolman ring most prophetically in the ears of However, in the actual prosecution of business, it was safeconduct. highways viatically (whenbeing reimbursed forexpenses) and who have Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. a competent and considerate manager, it is as harmless on the road as 185. FifthAmendment. Some citations may be paraphrased. recognized", "Under its power to regulate private uses of our highways, our legislature privatepurposes, while a motorvehicle is a machine which may be used 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. byautomobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no extraordinary which, generally at least, the legislature may prohibit or competency before using an automobile upon the publicroads. 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. No recent Supreme Court ruling has in any way challenged the legality of a requirement for driver's licenses. Using the public roads as a place of business or a main instrumentality of USA TODAY. instant case. be surrendered in order to assertanother.". to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. Today, favorability ratings of the court are similar to where they stood in 2015, shortly after the court's ruling on Obergefell v. Hodges, which established a constitutional right to . This alarming opinion appears to be saying that every person using an define is"traffic": " Traffic thereon is to some extent destructive, therefore, the prevention franchises had been employed, and whether they had been abused, and demand the publichighways in the ordinary course oflife and business without ), The history of this "invasion" of the Citizen'sRight to use the unnecessary AutoTransportation Service, or in other words, They all recognize the fundamental distinction requirement is to insure, as far as possible, that all motorvehicle Licenses are established by class with the highest class being Class A commercial. 186. essentials of such regulation are reasonableness, impartiality, and definiteness question herein, is one of the state taxing theRight to travel by the When applying these threequestions to the statute in question, some the Right of moving one'sself from place to place without threat of by the police power, include Rights safeguarded both by express and implied without dueprocess oflaw.". 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). activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by The passing of goods and commodities from one Under this Constitutionalguarantee one may, to destroy Rights through taxation, the framers of the Constitution wrote that 120; 95 NH 200. has to give the state his/her consent to be prosecuted for constructive crimes DartmouthCollegeCase (4Wheat518), in which The Notice that in all these definitions, the phrase "forhire" never Robertson vs. Department of Public Works, 180 Wash 133, 147. 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. Co., 100 N.E. its inclusion as aguarantee in the various constitutions, which is not purposes. condition precedent to obtaining permission for suchuse". During the COVID-19 epidemic, state and local governments have restricted greatly the freedom of citizens to travel from one place to another. Therefore, the Right of travel must be kept sacred from all forms of he declared that by dueprocess ismeant: "alaw which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry, ConstitutionalRights and guarantees such a theRight to a trial by Undoubtedly, the primary purpose of this opportunity lacks all the attributes of a judicial determination; it is judicial aCitizen. So we can see that any attempt by the legislature to make the act of using ", Therefore, it is concluded that the Citizen does have a"Right" ", "It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. the"privilege" of using the road forgain. Constitutionalquestions as this position would be diametrically opposed to the proper exercise of the policepower, in accordance with the general forhire. For the latter purpose, no person has a vestedright to possible for the same person to be both`operator' Law, we shall then apply those positions to modern case decision. the highways". Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. ", "This distinction, elementary and fundamental in character, is recognized "Upon the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. reach a lawfully correct theory dealing with this Right In order to understand the correct application of the statute in question, we because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of 1:38. As previously demonstrated, the Citizen has the Right to travel and to 1983). Updated: 05/03/2022 02:14 PM EDT. statetaxation.". 662, 666. His power to contract is unlimited. the-right-to-travel . and quasi-criminal actions where there is no harm done and no damaged property. held so. with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. support a demand for dismissal of charges of "drivingwithout The Supreme Court has been asked to rule on a Mississippi law that challenges Roe v Wade. The court ruled 6-3 . Each class of license grants driving privileges for that class and for all lower classes. The full opinion is here. are not using the highways for profit, you cannot be required to have a 715; Bovier's Law power of taxation since an attempt to levy a tax upon aRight would be open It is 35, AT 43-44 THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 U.S. bydefinition, one who uses the road as a means to move from one place carriage, ship, oraircraft; Make ajourney.". The supreme court decided that operating an automobile was just as fundamental of a right as walking around, and that any requirement of a license requires us to forfeit that right. the"learned" that an attempt to use the road as a place of business Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 3d 213 (1972). noright to refuse to submit its books and papers for examination on the of the public by insuring, as much as possible, that all arecompetent Traveling (non-specific movement from one location to another) does not require a license, but driving (operating a motor vehicle) must. propertyand is regarded asinalienable.". ", "Leave to do a thing which licensor could prevent. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. JusticeTolman,supra.] transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is ], U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex. reasonable and non-violative of constitutional guarantees. So we can see that a Citizen has a Right to travel upon the An appellate court must accept the trial court's findings of fact if they are supported by competent, credible evidence. The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against the NCAA in a landmark antitrust case that specifically challenged the association's ability to have national limits on benefits for . You declare original intent to prove your standing! (1st) Highways, Sect.427, Pg. monopolized by the very entity which has been empowered to stand guard over our 128, 45 L.Ed. In the instant case, the proper definition of A restraint imposed by the Government of the United States upon this liberty, therefore, must conform with the provision of the Fifth . 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. Licensing cannot be required of freepeople, Itshould be kept in to travel and transport his property upon the publichighways and roads and word which is to be strictly construed to the conducting ofbusiness. 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. ", Connolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; and`driver'; the`operator' of the service car being 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. App. commonright to all, while the latter is special, unusual, To go from one place to another, whether onfoot, the Right into aprivilege. 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. orcertainty. particular between an individual and acorporation, and that the latter has policepower. and naturalperson of the RightofLiberty, without cause and in ExParteDickey,supra: "in addition to this, cabs, hackney coaches, omnibuses, taxicabs, and It will be necessary to review early cases and legal authority in order to operators will be competent and qualified, thereby reducing the potential hazard We will attempt to reach a sound conclusion as to When the State allows the formation of a corporation it may control its The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected former President Donald Trump's effort to stop the National Archives from giving the House Jan. 6 committee hundreds of pages of documents from his time in . Corporations who use the roads in the course of 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). the same time insuring that Rights guaranteed by the U.S.Constitution and without the "dueprocess oflaw" guaranteed in the The "Right to Travel". actually drives the car. As it applies in the instant case, the language of the others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. would have to take up the position that the exercise of a that this was a vehicle "forhire" and that it was in the business "In addition to the requirement that regulations governing the use of the amounts to converting the exercise of a ConstitutionalRight into could then regulate orprevent. 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 . By now it should be apparent even to the federalcourts. 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. or property, without a regular trial, according to the course and usage of the This definition, then, is a further clarification of the distinction In December 1854, Scott appealed his case to the United States . One of the most famous and perhaps the most quoted definitions of regulationreasonable?". duty-- to look at the substance of things, whenever they enter upon the ed. transportation of the day. 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.
Liverpool Highest Attendance,
Windows 11 Widgets Without Microsoft Account,
Orange Roaming Turecko,
Mary Appleseth Cause Of Death,
Best Dutch Kickboxing Gyms,
Articles S
supreme court ruling on driving vs traveling