So Long, "Right to Travel." It's been good to know ya'.

[babylonsister]

So Long, "Right to Travel." It's been good to know ya'.



The freedom to travel has joined habeas corpus and freedom from unwarranted searches on America's endangered rights list. Over the last 10 years, a combination of federal legislation, court decisions and new federal regulations have greatly reduced the rights of U. S. citizens to travel internationally and domestically.

As Old as the Magna Carta

The right to go where one wishes is among the most fundamental and ancient of freedoms in the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. Article 42 of the Magna Carta provided:

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 nation at war against us, and Merchants who shall be treated as it is said above.

Despite its long tradition, the right to travel has been under attack at other times in American history. During the Red-baiting 50's, Congress enacted a law requiring that American citizens possess passports in order to leave or enter the country and delegated the authority to the Secretary of State to determine the criteria for issuing passports. Shortly thereafter, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles denied a passport to Rockwell Kent on grounds that he was a Communist. Kent challenged the refusal in court, and the case eventually reached the U. S. Supreme Court. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion for the majority that ordered the State Department to issue the passport:

"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. So much is conceded by the Solicitor General. In Anglo-Saxon law that right was emerging at least as early as the Magna Carta. Three Human Rights in the Constitution of 1787 shows how deeply engrained in our history this freedom of movement is. Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, may be necessary for a livelihood. It may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values. 'Our nation,' wrote Chafee, '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.' (citations omitted)

more...

http://sheltersfromthestorm.org/main/shelter/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=526&Itemid=77

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

1. Oh, God.

More bitching about having to get a passport to travel internationally. Oh, and some additional whining about refusing passports to parents who owe child support until they pay up. Geesh, what a horror.

[monktonman]

2. My son lives in Toronto

Yes WHAT A FUCKING HORROR!
Yes, I get to pay what amounts to a tax just to visit my child.
The Canadians dont even ask for my ID let alone a passport.
On the return trip I'm treated like a criminal.
I was frickin born here, doesnt that mean ANYTHING anymore?

Nineteen guys fly a plane into a building and I get punished.
Cool.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Ok lets clarify this

usually most countries REQUIRE passports

What is more... my parents, they come from Mexico

Not only are they required to have a passport by INS, but also a visa

You know what? High times Americans were treated in this respect a little more like the rest of the nations in the world

And I sure hope Canada starts requiring them from YOU too

After all, Canadians ARE asked for passports by INS too

And this started WELL BEFORE 9.11

Oh and I forgot to add, that right to travel anywhere is INSIDE your country, not across international borders

You could not enter the Highlands, for example, without a safe passage in time of strife, The sme went for other parts of the UK.

[alfredo]

7. Soon you will have to have a Real ID or passport to enter federal parks.

There was a thread about that. If you are not from a state that is going along with the Real ID law, you will have to have a passport.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. That is different than requiring passports to travel abroad

a whole different ball of wax

Insofar as having passports to travel abroad, everybody needs them

[alfredo]

13. Would you want to have to show a passport of a National ID card to

visit Yosemite?

[Posteritatis]

17. Er, he just said that's a completely different situation

Requiring passports for international travel = completely routine.

Requiring passports for domestic travel = bad and wrong.

It's not that complex.

[alfredo]

23. Internal travel restrictions will come to the US soon.

[monktonman]

10. ....besides, If I wasnt doing anything wrong....

I wouldnt have to worry about it. Right?

Answer me this...Why is it that the Canadians never give me a hard time but coming back to my native country (you know the one my family has lived in for generations) is sometimes a living hell?

PS...what is it with DUers lately?

PSS...if you dont live in a northern border state, you'll never understand.

[nashville_brook]

16. i'm with ya -- there's some mighty backward thinking here lately

[monktonman]

19. DU-cons have invaded DU

[nashville_brook]

39. kinda fun keeping track of who is who

nice to meet YOU, monktonman. we DU-libs have to stick together, apparently! :evilgrin:

[sailor65]

dup delete

[sailor65]

33. I do live in a border state

And I play hockey twice a week in Sarnia, crossing the Blue Water Bridge every time. The Canadian Border Officials ask for my passport every time, and have for quite a while. And I never receive any grief at all from our own border. They are polite to me, I am polite to them.

Perhaps yout treatment at the border has more to do with your attitude than anything else?

[The Vinyl Ripper]

20. Not so in the EU

You can travel where you will in the EU without a passport if you are citizen of an EU member state.

[Igel]

34. So what you're saying is that if I fly to London on my US passport,

I can freely travel anywhere without showing it again if I say I'm actually a Spanish citizen?

There's no ID requirement, nothing other than my word?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

43. No, it's more like once you're in an EU country, there's no further

requirement to show your passport as you cross a border into another EU country.

So if you're in France and want to go to Belgium, it's like going from one U.S. state to another.

[Crayson]

46. Not Fly.... Travel

Flying always involves some ID document to pick up the tickets, to go through screening, etc...

But the border crossings between EU countries (SCHENGEN treaty is the word, not all of the newer EU countries) are actually unmanned.
But border guards have the right to stop you within some kilometers behind the border and search your car if they have grounds for suspicion.
But there is no regular control anymore, you just drive through, no stopping or showing passports.
Most border crossings are fitted with video surveillance though which probably record your license plate.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

47. But there *is* external control.

All of the Schengen countries have unified enforcement along their coastlines and borders with non-EU countries. That isn't the case with the US, Canada, and Mexico.

[treestar]

28. Actually it's not that common a requirement for getting back into

your own country.

Generally you will have it because you needed it to get into the other country.

But if the other country doesn't require it, you shouldn't need it to get back into your own country. Therefore if Canada doesn't need it to get into Canada, it is ludicrous that you only need it to get back into your own country.

Of course the Canadians are bound to start requiring it, since they will be stuck with Americans not allowed to return.

Americans think they can go anywhere they like, when in reality it is up to that country - most countries happen to let Americans in easily, many without visas, some even without passports. And the visas, even if required, are easy to get.

[stirlingsliver]

21. Canada is a Foreign Country

Contrary to what many people in the USA think, Canada is a foreign country.

Like France. Or Great Britain.

You need a passport to travel to most foreign countries.

Why do you think you should NOT need one to travel to Canada?

[monktonman]

22. No, I think I shouldnt need one...

TO TRAVEL BACK TO THE US!!!!!!!!!!!
The Canadians have never asked for my passport.
NOT ONCE!!

I am a us citizen (white and blatently irish)
I shouldnt be harrassed entering my own country.

Are there a bunch of DUers working at the passport office or something?
Its hard to believe that anyone here thinks these new passport rules are a good thing.
If you do....rather than flaming me, have the balls to explain why the new passport rules are a good thing.
Cum on, have some guts and expose yourself.

[stirlingsliver]

24. The USA Will Ask For Your Passport When You Return From the UK

The USA will ask for your passport when you return from the UK or France or Turkey or Vietnam.

Why should returning from Canada be any different?

In fact, when I travelled by air to Canada in 2001, I had to show my passport in order to return (by air) to the USA.

Canada truly is a foreign country.

[monktonman]

25. No shit sherlock.

I never thought Canada was part of the US (thank god)
I also never had to have a passport until last year and the new rules change.
If you lived in a northern border state you'd understand.

On a lighter note: Sometimes I travel to the mid west to visit family. On several occasions people have asked me where I'm from and when I say Vermont I almost always get a dumb response. Examples include "welcome to America" , "it must be cold up there in Canada." and my all time fave "wow, you speak pretty good english"

With that in mind YES I KNOW CANADA IS A FOREIGN COUNTRY!!!! Is that all you've got????? I've been traveling to Canada since my sons birth, sixteen years now, only now, I have to have a passport. Nineteen guys enter the USA LEGALLY (let me repeat) LEGALLY and blow up some buildings. The bushies response and some at DEMOCRATIC underground is to make americans who want to travel to the country that IS what America pretends to be, submit finger prints and DNA just to COME BACK HOME.
Does that make sense to you?????

One more time....THE CANADIANS ARE NOT REQUIRING PASSPORTS FROM AMERICAN VISITORS. we require them to come home. why is my drivers liscence not enough?

[stirlingsliver]

26. Tsk. Tsk.

Canada required me to present a passport when I flew into Toronto on a commercial flight from the US in 2001.

The US required me to present a passport when I flew from Toronto back to the US on a commercial flight in 2001.

Canada, it seems, has, in fact, required a passport from those of us who are citizens of the USA since at least 2001.

And, fyi, I have lived in northern border states. In fact, on a trip back from Ontario I was stopped an detained for some time by USA authorities when I was driving back into the US. Seems my hair was a bit longer than the guards thought it should be.
I spent 4 hours with the US authorities before they would let me cross the international frontier.

So please -- don't lecture me about not understanding. I do understand that Canada and the USA are two separate countries. Each has its own rules about who can and cannot enter.

And the right to travel to or from Canada is still pretty much the same as it has been for the past few years.

[treestar]

29. For the same reasons it has been different for the last several eons

A very long border, a common culture and thus many contacts on either side.

Canadians can visit the U.S. without a visa, whereas other countries' nationals cannot.

There is a logical reason for treating bordering nations less restrictively. Canada extends that to us.

[eridani]

42. And here all this time I thought they were just Americans--

--who would rather have health care than guns.

[Igel]

35. My impression is that the US passport functions as

the ID cards most countries would probably require. It's one thing to say that border crossings will be lax--I had no problem crossing into Canada *or* the US back in 1999 (or was it 2000?). I think I had to show local ID, not no ID. Then again, to get the local ID I had to verify citizenship; such was the state driver's license.

However, it's not unreasonable for a country to limit easy ingress to citizens. Problem is, how do you show you're a citizen? Otherwise it'd be easy to claim citizenship of whatever country you're heading to. Today I'm a British citizen, but when I need to fly to Russia I'm a Russian citizen and next week I'll be Canadian. Yes, my family of 12 monolingual Punjabi-speakers in traditional Pakistani dress are US citizens, could you tell me what currency I need to convert my money into when I'm in Idaho? The usual way of establishing that you are a citizen is by showing some form of ID.

Problem is, when you cross *national* borders, it's not unreasonable to expect to show *national* ID. When my drivers license shows only that I'm a resident of state X, and not a citizenship of the country, it's no longer useful for showing citizenship. In the US, for that, that leaves only one kind of ID.

I assume that if you have the right accent they can assume you're a citizen. But since most naturalized Americans have accents, and most of them are Latino, you'd find that most of the people whose IDs are checked are Latinos. Cries of racism would follow several seconds later.

Show a way to demonstrate American citizenship without showing a document or relying on anything that has a racial correlation, and you'll have convinced me.

[HamdenRice]

49. The OP is about right to leave, not about right to be allowed in another country

See post 48.

[Tesha]

3. As long as it's not *YOUR* rights being gored, it's okay, ehh? (NT)

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. Well, yeah.

I'm not a deadbeat dad.

[Tesha]

14. Interestingly enough, the example cited in the article is a deadbeat mom.

> I'm not a deadbeat dad.

Interestingly enough, the example cited in the article is a
deadbeat mom.

As is Mr. Tesha's ex.

But we still don't think the government should lift her
passport because of that.

Tesha

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

15. If I were somehow to become a deadbeat mom...

...not having a passport would be the least of my problems.

[AndyTiedye]

9. The Article Cites an Example of How That Requirement Was ABUSED in the Past

Rockwell Kent was refused a passport for his politics, not for unpaid child support.
Do you think the current administration would never do such a thing?

"International travel", in the case of those living near the Canadian border,
may just be to the next town. A passport will be required even for that.
Between the application fee and the cost of a passport photo, a passport costs
almost $100 — more if you need it in less than 6 months. I am sure that the
cost would be prohibitive for some people.

[monktonman]

11. We have a town in Vermont

Where you could cross the border and not even know it.
No gaurds, no toll shack, nothing.
Just a line down the middle of the street.

[treestar]

31. Travel is a fundamental human right; it should not be used to enforce

any other law - by restricting it - and international travel always has different rules and exceptions.

Canadians and Americans don't need visas to go to each other's countries.

We don't require the British to have visas to visit the U.S., yet we do require the Russians to get a visa.

Not all international travel is the same and there are good reasons why some countries are treated differently.

This is a neighboring, very similar country. We don't have to obsess over this border.

[Igel]

38. Actually, it's not.

If you're being arraigned and you're a flight risk, you are detained. Otherwise you're told not to leave the jurisdiction--this is clearly a judicial restriction on your right to travel. Not only is it used as part of enforcing some other law, it's used for enforcing most other laws.

What's different is that it's a state or local court decision that's enforced by the federal government. On the other hand, considering that child support tends to be enforced only with difficulty across state lines, I guess I can understand why the feds would get involved--withholding tax return money, for example.

Now, if you steal a car, are out on bail, and try to flee the country it's not like the feds stop you at the border. But if they think you've just killed somebody and it's a federal crime, they quite well may try to stop you. Another infringement, one that few people complain about, but which shows that the right to travel is like the right to free speech--not an absolute.

[treestar]

41. It is a fundamental right

which means it can only be restricted by due process - the person who was arraigned and deemed a flight risk had a hearing on that subject. But that's due to being a flight risk for the charge at hand.

It is probably an unconstitutional restriction to use it to enforce an unrelated law.

[Rex]

32. Well you are an expert on whining so...

Nothing like an 'expert' from another country crying about something he knows nothing about domestically. :eyes:

[MattSh]

44. If using passports to catch deadbeats are a legitimate reason....

Then maybe passports should be issued for a year, not for 10 years. A lot of damage can be done by not paying child support for 10 years. And a lot of new revenue can be generated for the war by having citizens get a new passport every year.

Or, conversely, maybe some good old fashioned police work could be used to catch deadbeats, instead of using public funds to drive around in luxury SUV's?

Let's keep the police work in the police department, and not require the traveling public to pay for work the police don't want to do.

[cmd]

4. Someone else leaving DU?

:evilgrin:

Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

[monktonman]

5. Do I need a passport???

Also could not resist

[Blaze Diem]

18. So people w/a felony record will never be allowed to leave their homes?

Have a friend who was charged with a felony about 6 years ago. She had a 'breakdown'/clinical depresson, meds prescribed sent her into a freefall where she wrote a bunch of bad checks, & was charged w/ a felony, did a year in the State Pen.. she lived 48 years with barely a speeding ticket until her mental health was challenged beyond her control. Managed to pay back all fines , etc. and I am just wondering how this Real I.D. thing will affect her life.
I don't think she can even GET a passport with the Felony on her perm. record.

Any ideas on this subject? And it does bring to question the many citizens who have served 'time' for nonviolent crimes due to an illness such as my friend's was.
She still struggles w/ depression, but with no insurance, she tries to manage it on her own.

She is the kindest person in the world, and truely was a victim of an unjust system in a country who cares little for the mental health of its own.

Curious about how this REAL ID thing will impact her life.

Thanks

[pitohui]

50. felons are not supposed to travel to canada without special exemptions

i hate to say it but it's pretty standard that other countries will not admit travelers from the u.s. who have a felony on their records, just as we're not supposed to admit foreigners who have felonies on their records

she doesn't have to stay in her home, the usa is a big place with a lot to see, but even if she has a passport she is probably not supposed to travel to most other countries to my knowledge


canada is not even supposed to admit DUIs except in exceptional circumstances, such as, the president/vp of the usa

unfortunately, while a jury might understand an assault or some other snap as being caused by mental illness, i can see why it would be difficult for them to understand a crime committed for profit as an illness rather than a felony

unless there is some way to get the felony pardoned or expunged i think your friend will not be traveling to canada

i don't see where REAL ID makes a difference one way or another, she already can't go there, at least not legally

[mnhtnbb]

27. Keep your passport current. Don't have one? GET ONE NOW!

[DangerDave921]

30. Da Man will get you

I didn't pay a parking ticket in time. Big deal. But when it comes time for my tags to get renewed, I don't get the new stickers. I just get a letter telling me my stickers are being held up until I pay the parking ticket late fee. All the computers talk to each other nowadays. And I have to pay a freaking penalty to the Motor Vehicle Administration for their processing fee.

You know what? It's called compliance. If you don't pay your taxes, fines, child support, etc., the government is going to hold something else over your head until you pay. So quit your bitching. Don't be a dead-beat and you'll be OK. I love the folks who don't do what they're supposed to, then get all bent out of shape when the government tries to force them. Oh, the humanity!!!

LOL

[SoCalDem]

36. That happened to me once, and I never even GOT a damned ticket

My sneaky little shithead son got one when he borrowed my car, and of course he "forgot" to pay it, or even tell me..He paid later though..in more ways than one :)

[stirlingsliver]

37. Mom?

Mom?

Is that you?

I thought you told me you had forgotten about the unfortunate occurance with the ticket.

;-)

[SoCalDem]

40. You're STILL grounded!

:)

[Crayson]

45. Restriction in Magna Carta applies to US:

"...unless it be in time of war, for some short space, for the common good of the kingdom..."

-US is in wartime
-define "short space"
-define "good of the kingdom" (I love this, the word "KINGDOM" applies real good)

[HamdenRice]

48. Amazing how many DUers seem never to have heard of Soviet Jews, South Africa or Eastern Europe

Sounds like a number of DUers need history lessons. The article is not about needing a passport or visa to get into another country; it's about the right of US citizens to leave the US, or US citizens to re-enter the US.

From the 1950s through the 1970s, the international community roundly condemned the Soviet Union, the Warsaw block and East Germany for their refusal to allow their citizens to leave their countries. The right to leave your country is one of the most fundamental rights in international human rights. For a government to say you must have a passport to leave your country -- assuming some other country will let you in -- obviously erases that right, because a government may refuse to issue a passport in order to frustrate that right. Traditionally, the passport is required by foreign governments to enter, not by our own government to leave.

For those of you who are too young, or who have short memories, up until the the Bush administration, no American was required to present a passport during international travel from the US by the US government (although airlines required you to present a passport to get a boarding pass if the destination country required one, simply so they could avoid the possible cost of having to fly you back if you were denied entry).

Withholding a passport to prevent citizens from leaving was a favorite tactic of the South African government. They either refused to issue passports to South African dissidents to keep them in the country, thereby preventing the outside world from gaining knowledge about conditions in that country, or having issued a passport and allowed the citizen to leave, confiscated the passport once the person was overseas, turning the citizen into a stateless person. That is how famous South African exiles, like Merriam Makeba, became stateless refugees.

The Nazis also refused to allow Jews to leave Germany. Apparently, many DUers are unaware that not only did the Nazis round up Jews for extermination, but in order to make the final solution more complete, they prevented Jews from leaving on their own accord and at their own expense, from territories under Nazi occupation.

The right to leave, passport or not, is so fundamental in international human rights law, that the US successfully negotiated with the Soviet Union to allow Soviet Jews to leave in the 1970s. So central was the right to leave, that the entire Human Rights Watch movement was founded to monitor that right and others adopted under the Helsinki Accords. For those of you who seem to be unaware of this right and this history, Human Rights Watch was originally a much smaller organization called "Helsinki Watch," because its original purpose was to monitor the human rights and emmigration commitments undertaken by the Soviet Union under the Helsinki Accords.

By forcing the Soviets to live up to their Helsinki obligations, the international community made possible the massive emigration of Soviet Jews from Russia and into the United States and Israel from the 1970s until the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It was the decision in late 1989 of the reformist communist government of Czechoslovakia, to allow unrestricted emigration -- thereby allowing East Germans a route to circumvent the Berlin crossing -- that forced East Germany to open the Berlin Wall, eventually leading to the popular destruction of the Berlin Wall, and the collapse of communist dictatorships in East Germany and throughout Eastern Europe.

The only valid reason for the federal government to refuse to allow someone to leave is if that person is a flight risk in a criminal prosecution. As the linked article points out, when the federal government withholds a passport and right to leave because a person is behind on child support payments, then the federal government is using the suppression of the right to leave to enforce a civil, not criminal, judgement. As the article points out, this creates a precedent that, taken to its logical conclusion, could be used to prevent a person from leaving the country because his credit card bill is overdue, or because he hasn't paid his electricity bill. This is an absurd precedent.

As for needing a passport to re-enter the US, it seems many are confusing a passport with citizenship. Every citizen has the right to re-enter the US, passport or not. A passport is proof of citizenship, not citizenship itself. It is a convenient, fool proof way for a person to prove that he is a citizen -- which is the only requirement for re-enty -- not a requirement.

Some of the responses in this thread are appalling. This is not about enforcement of "compliance," but about the Bush administration's attempt to fence American citizens in and prevent our free interaction with the people of the world outside our borders.