Safe travels unenforceable?

[malahini]

See my edited post directly before this on the last page.

Here it is again:

Airline rules are airline rules. The state has no control over them. That's not what this was about. That's why I did not bother to mention them before.

Neither of you are very good at this.

I start to convince myself I must be right when no one actually has a real rebuttal to anything I am saying.

However... OOPS. It looks like I have to admit defeat, but only at my own hands. Neither of you are very good at debating...

I somehow missed this.

Railroad Co. v. Husen (1877) 95 U.S. 465, 471.

And

Compagnie Francaise de Navigation à Vapeur v. Louisiana State Bd. of Health (1902) 186 U.S. 380.

What's interesting about the latter is they actually turned a ship away. This is similar to what they do to people at the airport when they put them on a plane back to the mainland.

However, I'm not sure any restriction like this has lasted for nearly two years. At some point Ige's legal authority to do this will run afoul of the feds.

There's also the issue that neither of these dealt with travel of PERSONS across state lines. Just a foreign ship and US cattle. That said it certainly weakens the case that it would necessarily get overturned by a federal court.

https://marinbar.org/news/article/?type=news&id=553

Code:

The longer these restrictions remain in effect, the more they demand judicial scrutiny. That said, noted constitutional law professor Eugene Volokh of UCLA’s School of Law has opined that some forms of travel restrictions are likely to withstand scrutiny, “based on the general thrust of the cases—coupled with the fact that judges likely don't want to deny government officials the temporary tools they need to stave off likely tens of thousands (or more) deaths in this extraordinary time....” (Eugene Volokh, Restrictions on Interstate (and Intrastate) Travel in an Epidemic, The Volokh Conspiracy Blog (Apr. 4, 2020),

https://reason.com/volokh/2020/04/04/res...-epidemic/

I trust Volokh...

Code:

Generally speaking, state governments can't bar people from entering a state, or for that matter traveling within the state. Such prohibitions might normally violate the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, or a substantive due process right to travel.

But the law has long recognized that a state faced with real danger of contagious disease can restrict these rights

Notice in the past I mentioned interstate commerce/commerce clause. As well as 14th due process rights. I do know what I am talking about, mostly.

[Obie]

State travels unenforceable ?

That question has been answered with a no.

That couple paid a fine. That's enforcement.

[malahini]

State Travels Uninforcable ?

That question has been answered with a yes.

That couple paid a fine. That's inforcement.

Disorderly conduct isn't the same thing dude. You're right for different reasons though. Just not for the reasons you think. It is *e*nforceable. Someone pleading no contest to disorderly conduct doesn't necessarily prove it though.

And actually, since they were residents it makes things even more complicated because these SCOTUS cases only really apply to non-residents.