Shira And Diego, Articles S

So if you refuse to read the 10th AMENDMENT to see that in our Bill of Rights that it says anything not specifically laid out in the constitution is up to the states to decide. 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. It might be expensive but your argument won't hold up in court and I will win when I track you down because you refuse to take responsibility for your attempted manslaughter which you'll be charged with a homicide once the judge finds out why you don't have what's required of you. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages. A farmer has the same right to the use of the highways of the state, whether on foot or in a motor vehicle, as any other citizen. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of. " ----- -----ARGUMENT I. Some people interpret this right as meaning that they do not need a driver's license to operate a vehicle on public roadways, but do state and federal laws agree with that interpretation? Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982; Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived., Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. I seen this because my brother, who is gullible to the extreme, kept ranting about Supreme court says no license necessary. This material may not be reproduced without permission. It is sometimes said that in America we have the "right to our opinion". Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. Barb Lind, you make these statements about laws being laws, and that it only means that you can drive on your own property without a license. Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. We are here to arrive at the truth about what has been done to our country, and true history, not as we see it, but as our Creator sees it. 1, the 'For The People Act', which aims to counter restrictive state voting . - Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty. People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. If you want to do anything legal for a job, you need the states the right to travel does not pertain to driving at all and usually pertains to the freedom of movement of a passenger. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways", 10) The term "used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. I have been studying and Practicing both Criminal and Civil law for 25 years now. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets. Christian my butt. When you have an answer to that, send them out to alter public property and youll find the government still objects, because what they MEANT was government property, but they didnt want you to notice. Search, Browse Law I would also look up the definition of "Traffic". Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances., Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. USA TODAY 0:00 2:10 WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to give police the automatic power to enter homes without a warrant when they're in "hot pursuit" for a misdemeanor. When anyone is behind the wheel of a vehicle capable of causing life-changing injury and/or death it is the right of the state to protect everyone else from being hurt or killed and them have no financial responsibility or even if they are able to be sued never pay. The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it. Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. 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. 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 2 2 "A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle." Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. We have agents of this fraud going around the country fleecing the people under fraud, threat, duress, coercion, and intimidation, sometimes at the point of a gun, to take their hard earned cash and to make the elite rich beyond belief, while forcing good law abiding people to lose their livelihood, and soon to steal their very bank accounts to prop up the big banks once again. The email address cannot be subscribed. Why do you feel the inclination to lie to people? The Affordable Care Act faced its third Supreme Court challenge in 2021. 0 automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. The We Are Change site, which posted the original claim, says it is, a "nonpartisan, independent media organization comprised of individuals and groups working to expose corruption worldwide.". The thinking goes, If the Supreme Court says it's a right to use the highway, the state can't require me to get a license and then grant me permission to drive, because it's already my right . | Last updated November 08, 2019. 2d 588, 591. The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that it is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment for a police officer to make an investigative traffic stop after running the license plate of a vehicle and learning that the owner's driver's license has been revoked, even if the officer is unsure that the owner is driving the vehicle. 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. . The foreign corporation we call government uses transliteration and bastardization of the Amercian/English language to manipulate and control their serfs, slaves, subjects and servants called United States Citizens, Incorporated. Not without a valid driver's license. U.S. Supreme Court says No License NecessaryTo Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely, 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 1 1 U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS, "The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Licensed privileges are NOT rights. Please try again. Kim LaCapria is a former writer for Snopes. Some citations may be paraphrased. Check out Bovier's law dictionary. The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation. Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. Contact us. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. Unless you have physically called the Justices of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, and asked each and everyone of them if the Headline Posted on Paul LeBreton site is Correct, then you have no right to tell people that it's not true. If you want to verify that the supreme court has made a ruling about something, go to supremecourt.gov and search for it. A. This is corruption. If they were, they were broken the first time government couldnt keep up their end of it. VS. 186. Supreme Court says states may not impose mandatory life sentences on juvenile murderers. Will it be only when they are forced to do so? We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. Saying "well that's just the law" is what's wrong with the people in this country. So, I agree with your plea but not your stance. That case deals with a Police Chief trying to have someone's license suspended. If you need an attorney, find one right now. The buzz started again in January of 2020 when a woman shared a link to a fake story from 2015 with Facebook users on the "Restore Liability For the Vaccine Makers" page. WASHINGTON The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that police officers may stop vehicles registered to people whose driver's licenses had been suspended on the assumption that the driver was the. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here. You THINK you can read the law and are so ill informed. Your membership is the foundation of our sustainability and resilience. Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. http://www.paulstramer.net/2010/03/red-amendment-how-your-freedom-was.html, http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/05/emergency-communications-what-you.html, http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/10/bombshell-rod-class-gets-fourth.html, http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/11/what-is-really-law-and-what-is-not-law.html, http://www.paulstramer.net/2010/03/montana-freemen-speak-out-from-inside.html, http://www.paulstramer.net/2009/10/from-gary-marbut-mssa-to-mssamtssa.html, Posted byPaul Stramerat9:58 AM2 comments:Email This, Labels:commercial courts,contract law,drivers license,Right to travel,us corporation. 662, 666. You "mah raights" crowd are full of conspiracy theories. It only means you can drive on YOUR property without a license. wKRDbJ]' QdsE ggoPoqhs=%l2_txx^_OGMCq}u>S^g1?_vAoMVmVC>?U1]\.Jb|,q59OQ)*F5BP"ag8"Hh b!9cao!. The language is as clear as one could expect. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.. It has NOTHING to do with your crazy Sovereign Citizen BS. ., Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). You're actually incorrect, do some searching as I am right now. If you have a suspended license and outstanding fines, Operation Green Light could be your ticket to getting back behind the wheel. . 1907). I wonder when people will have had enough. Anything that is PUBLIC doesn't have that "right". 3rd 667 (1971) The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. Other right to use an automobile cases: , TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 WILLIAMS VS. The Supreme Court NEVER said that. If you believe your rights have been unjustly limited, you may have grounds for legal action.An experienced legal professionalcan provide advice and assistance when it comes to ensuring you are able to fully exercise your rights. hb``` cb`QAFu;o(7_tMo6wd+\;8~rS *v ,o2;6.lS:&-%PHpZxzsNl/27.G2p40t00G40H4@:` 0% \&:0Iw>4e`b,@, to make money or profit) then you don't need a license to travel within the United States, also if that is the case, then you would need a driver's license and insurance to even purchase a vehicle. The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets. If this is all true, just think of how much more we have been deceived about in law for the purpose of collecting our money to use for immorality and evil. So, let us start with your first citation: Berberine v Lassiter: False citation, missing context. And thanks for making my insurance go up because of your lack of being a decent person. It seems what you are really saying is you do not agree with the laws but they are actually laws. 6, 1314. H|KO@=K The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles. Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135, "The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. Use only the sites that end in .gov and .edu!! Part of those go to infrastructure to keep the roads safe and maintained along with a ton of other programs. A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle. Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. Because roads and highways are public infrastructure and operating a vehicle poorly has the potential to harm others and their property, state governments are within their rights to require citizens to have a driver's license before operating a vehicle on public roads, and states do require drivers to be properly licensed. 157, 158. The administrator reserves the right to remove unwarranted personal attacks. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that a person's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the subject is arrested for driving without a seatbelt.The court ruled that such an arrest for a misdemeanor that is punishable only by a fine does not constitute an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The term motor vehicle means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways 10) The term used for commercial purposes means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it., Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. 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 use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. 35, AT 43-44 - THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 - U.S. Snopes cited the fuller context of the ruling, which said: 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 The word automobile connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways., -American Mutual Liability Ins. 662, 666. People who are haters and revolutionaries make irrational claims with no basis of fact or truth. The court sent the case back to the lower . Complex traffic tickets usually require a lawyer, Experienced lawyers can seek to reduce or eliminate penalties. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) It came from an attorney who litigates criminal traffic offenses, which driving without a license is a misdemeanor of the 2nd degree in most states. Co., 24 A. Our goal is to create a community of truth-seekers and peacemakers who share a commitment to nonviolent action," the site says. In a decisive win for the Fourth Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday refused "to print a new permission slip for entering the home without a warrant.". %%EOF 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. . Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). Bouviers Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road. 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. I suggest those interested look up the definition of "Person" or "Individual". 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. Created byFindLaw's team of legal writers and editors Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.". When expanded it provides a list of search options that will switch the search inputs to match the current selection. "Our goal is to create a community of truth-seekers and peacemakers who share a commitment to nonviolent action," the site says. Idc. And driving without a license is indeed illegal in all 50 states. One example of this claim opens with an out-of-context quote before launching into a potpourri of case excerpts from the Supreme Court and lower courts: "The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highway and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 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 2 2 A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle. Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. David Mikkelson founded the site now known as snopes.com back in 1994. No matter which state you live in, you are required by law to have a valid driver's license and all endorsements needed for the type of vehicle you are operating, e.g., motorcycle endorsements, commercial vehicle endorsements, etc.Driving without a valid licensecan result in significant charges. WASHINGTON The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a Pennsylvania school district had violated the First Amendment by punishing a student for a vulgar social media message sent while she. 465, 468. The decision stated: After doing a search for several days I came across the most stable advise one could give. 762, 764, 41 Ind. "a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon " State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business." offense; North Dakota subsequently suspended his drivers' license when the test returned positive. If a policy officer pulls someone over, the first question is may I see a driver's license. People will only be pushed so far, and that point is being reached at breakneck speed these days. You'll find the quotes from the OP ignore the cases/context they are lifted from. The Supreme Court agreed to hear a major Second Amendment dispute that could settle whether the Constitution protects a right to carry guns in public. 942 0 obj <> endobj App. The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. 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). Go to 1215.org. In other words, the court held that although the use of public roads is a right which citizens enjoy, local authorities may nonetheless regulate such use (including imposing a requirement that motor vehicle operators obtain licenses) so long as such regulations are reasonable, not arbitrary, and apply equally to everyone. 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). House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. "No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. 1983). Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here. K. AGAN. Demonstrators rally near the Supreme Court and the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. on June 24, 2021 in support of H.R. 351, 354. The deputy pulled the truck over because he assumed that Glover was driving. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) At issue was not the need to have a license (as was already affirmed) but the the financial responsibility law violated due process. 3d 213 (1972). The United States Constitution provides the legal basis for many of the rights American citizens enjoy. 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. 2d 588, 591. 26, 28-29. Here is the relevant case law, affirmed by SCOTUS. 26, 28-29. I have from time to time removed some commentsfrom the comments section,that were vicious personal attacks against an author, rather than an intelligent discussion of the issues,but veryrarely. Try again. If you're a free nationalist or a sovereign citizen, if you choose to boycott not only state laws that you want to buy every state law, I'd respect you. A driver's license is only legally required when doing commerce. Contact a qualified traffic ticket attorney to help you get the best result possible. I do invite everyone to comment as they see fit, but follow a few simple rules. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159; 20-979 Patel v. Garland (05/16/2022) had previously checked a box on a Georgia driver's license application falsely stating that he was a United States. WASHINGTON The Supreme Court, which has said that police officers do not need a warrant to enter a home when they are in "hot pursuit of a fleeing felon," ruled on Wednesday . While the right of travel is a fundamental right, the privilege to operate a motor vehicle can be conditionally granted based upon being licensed and following certain rules. Posted by Jeffrey Phillips | Jul 21, 2015 |, The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. (Paul v. Virginia). That does not mean in a social compact you get to disregard them. 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. "The Supreme Court Has Spoken: The Affordable Care Act Is the Law of the Land," was the title of a statement from the Democratic group Protect Our Care, founded to fight GOP repeal efforts in. In Thompson v Smith - SCOTUS The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. 241, 28 L.Ed. ), 8 F.3d 226, 235 19A Words and Phrases Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. A "private automobile" functions in that it is being driven - AND it is subject to regulations and permits (licenses.) App. The justices vacated . The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday against warrantless searches by police and seizures in the home in a case brought by a man whose guns officers confiscated after a domestic dispute . Name 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 186. ), 8 F.3d 226, 235" 19A Words and Phrases - Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. This site might have references but I read all of the stuff I said to in the beginning nowhere did it say driving is a right! Moreover, fewer than one in five Americans owned a car in the 1930s (a demographic that saw little upswing until after the end of World War II). 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. Learn more in our Cookie Policy. If you have the right to travel, you should be able to travel freely on public roads, right? A. 1983). Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. It has long been too easy for police officers to stop drivers on the highway, even without sufficient reason to believe a violation occurred. Anyone will lie to you. 41. "The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. Look up vehicle verses automobile. Snopes cited the fuller context of the ruling, which said: The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to other of like qualifications, under like circumstances and conditions. 21-846 argued date: November 1, 2022 decided date: February 22, 2023 The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts. Comment, 61 Yale L.J. inaccurate stories, videos or images going viral on the internet. Firms, Sample Letter re Trial Date for Traffic Citation. The Decision Below Undermines Law Enforcement's Efforts To Promote Public Safety. Chris Carlson/AP. If you truly believe this then you obviously have never learned what a scholarly source is. See some links below this article for my comments on this and related subjects. a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.Justice White, Hiibel Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles. Cumberland Telephone. Everyday normal citizens can legally travel without a license to get from point a to point b. 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 - SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) - CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978)Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. The Supreme Court on Thursday narrowed the scope of a federal cybercrime law, holding that a policeman who improperly accessed a license plate database could not be charged under the law.. How about some comments on this? Another bit of context elided from the example article is the fact that in when the referenced decision was handed down by the Supreme Court of Virginia in 1930, several of the 48 states did not yet require motorists to possess driver's licenses to operate motor vehicles on public roads. Lead Stories is a U.S. based fact checking website that is always looking for the latest false, misleading, deceptive or Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. 234, 236. 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. June 23, 2021. We never question anything or do anything about much. The US Supreme Court on April 29, 2021 in Washington, DC. at page 187. 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.