Home Forums Safety COVID-19: AJX Status Reply To: COVID-19: AJX Status

#8269

I wrote our beloved congress person, Paul Cook the following:

It’s my job to violate unjust laws, it’s your job to address and prosecute state government actors who violate the law of the land, by arbitrarily restricting freedom of movement.
Gavin Newsom and the police in California have violated Constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of movement, and I don’t see the federal government doing it’s job to prosecute unjust and illegal decrees.
State governments cannot legally enforce laws that restrict movement or travel anywhere in the state on public roads, or between states.
There’s plenty of case law on that.

U.S. Constitution Annotated Amendment XIV. RIGHTS GUARANTEED Section I
PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES

Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1868). It was observed in United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281, 299 (1920), that the statute at issue in Crandall was actually held to burden directly the performance by the United States of its governmental functions. Cf. Passenger Cases (Smith v. Turner), 48 U.S. (7 How.) 283, 491–92 (1849) (Chief Justice Taney dissenting). Four concurring Justices in Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160, 177, 181 (1941), would have grounded a right of interstate travel on the privileges or immunities clause. More recently, the Court declined to ascribe a source but was content to assert the right to be protected. United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 758 (1966); Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629–31 (1969). Three Justices ascribed the source to this clause in Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112, 285–87 (1970) (Justices Stewart and Blackmun and Chief Justice Burger, concurring in part and dissenting in part).