If the government passed a law saying "no one is allowed to leave America," would it be constitutional? I can't find anything in the constitution that protects citizens' rights to leave America or renounce their citizenship. Shouldn't there be a clause stating that people should be free to leave if they want? It bugs me that that's not in there. Yeah I know that people can leave America now without being stopped (in most cases), but what if Congress passed a law saying otherwise? Wouldn't that be scary? Or would people even notice?
2006-07-03 06:49:16 · 12 answers · asked by mastromatteom1 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
U.S. Constitutional Amendment Five -- the guarantee that no person shall be deprived of "liberty" without due process of law. For the government to hold people in the country would be unjust imprisonment... and unconstitutional.
Amendment IX -- The enumeration of rights in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage other [rights] retained by the people. If the right to leave the country is not specifically written in the constitution, nothing in the Constitution states or implies that we do not have that right.
Amendment X -- The powers not delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution (which are specific!)... remain with the States and the People. The power to restrict travel of the People in not given to the Federal Government by the Constitution. Those rights, therefore, remain with the States and the People.
Amendment XIII --Restricting travel (leaving) the U.S. could be construed as "involuntary servitude" [forced to work in the U.S.] -- which this Amendment prohibits.
Amendment XIV -- Prohibits the States from making or enforcing any law that abridges any person's privileges or immunities. No state can deny any person liberty (without due process).
Without going further, through the Amendments, I'd say we don't need another Amendment to prohibit the restriction of travel.
The Constitution also gives us the right to vote, so we would have to, essentially, vote for laws to restrict our travel.
The First Amendment, too, gives us the right to redress our government and laws where there is grievance. That would, surely, be a grievance!
So, I rest my case...
...except to say:
P.S. A law such as that would be SO outrageous that the people of the U.S., if we could not get rid of the lawmakers, would (simply) over throw the government. ... And make it "We, the People" again. :) Happy Fourth of July!!
P.P.S. Also, another branch of government -- most particularly, the Judicial -- should rule such a law Unconstitutional (assuming they are not in cahoots with the legislature). The U.S. Constitution created a system of "checks and balances" so that one branch does not get too powerful & take over the country like your suggesting in your question. :)
2006-07-03 07:48:29 · answer #1 · answered by cosmosclara 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, such a law would be scary, and I am pretty sure that people would notice. Russia, back when it was still the Soviet Union, used to shoot people who tried to leave, considering them traitors to the Motherland.
It is not against the law to leave the country and surrender your citizenship (I think Johnny Depp did this, and is now a french citizen). I do not think there should be a constitutional amendment prohibiting it, either. the Declaration of Independence states that people are free to pursue life, liberty and happiness. Sometimes that happiness or liberty takes them to accept a job or to marry someone from another country.
A lot of constitutional historians agree that the Constitution is meant to DEFINE freedoms, and not restrict them. the one time that Congress made an amendment prohibiting something, it was alcohol consumption. It failed miserably and was repealed less that a generation later.
Congress is made up of people with very short memories though. this is why you see proposals to amend the constitutin to limit what marriage is, or the expression fo free speech through flag-burning. These are both issues left to the human soul, and not the Law of the Land.
2006-07-03 14:00:26 · answer #2 · answered by arcayne_1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This isn't Russia or communist China, or the former East Berlin or N.Korea. This is where people were denied freedom of movement, and in the case of N.Korea and even China people are still denied certain freedoms.
As far as the constitution is concerned, we don't need upstarts suggesting or proposing changes. It's bad enough that some half tard in Congress will propose these changes, and it's a good thing they rarely have anyone giving their ideas any real thought.
I seriously doubt that a law could or would pass in this country, stating: "no one is allowed to leave America." It more likely that the law would state: "don't let the door hit you in the a ss."
2006-07-03 14:23:05 · answer #3 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, that's why they have passports to make sure people are safe when they are traveling to other countries. That passport proves that this peson is from another country and he will not be staying there permanently, so the country won't have to be worried. The USA can also track the people's leavings and gain facts about what the people are doing in the other countries. If it doesn't fit the reason the went there, then they can arrest the person.
I beleive that the Senate wouldn't allow such a thing, and if it did, people would be VERY angry. So angry in fact, that they could repeal the law.
2006-07-03 13:59:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're being very subtle about it but i believe they're already doing just that. As well as the reverse, keeping people out and admitting only those who take an active role in unscrupulous private agendas.
Irrespective, if they did or didn't, it would make official a renegade, illegitimacy.
In a real government an action like that would be recognized as legitimate. The former Soviets and present Chinese and North Koreans would militate against that and is their standard policy.
One huge slave camp to serve the interests of a very few. Franklin Roosevelt said it best; The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. I don't know of anyone who doesn't live in fear. However loud the bravado.
I choose not to. Truth is more satisfying, and the only thing that leads to a full life.
2006-07-03 13:58:00 · answer #5 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I could care less. If it comes to the point that I want to leave and they won't let me, then I'll force the issue. I am an American first, but a rebel by blood. If it comes down to the government not allowing us to leave then that's a signal that a revolution is needed...not a constitutional amendment.
2006-07-03 13:57:27 · answer #6 · answered by kelly24592 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if we all work together we can stop the Government from doing things that interfere with our rights and our freedoms.But it's not going to be easy as they have had their way for a long time now.The Kennedy's tried to do the right things and so did Martin Luther King but look what happened to them.
2006-07-03 13:57:29 · answer #7 · answered by theforce51 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whats scary is that you actually think this is an issue that needs to be addressed...
You can leave and renounce your citizenship anytime by immigrating (legally) to another country...
oh...and by the way...have a safe journey!
2006-07-03 13:54:20 · answer #8 · answered by Dave 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You need to get a life . If you are sitting around in America thinking up such things like this.How long have you been in America anyway?Our governmment doesn't work like that.
2006-07-03 16:28:07 · answer #9 · answered by locksniffer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Talk to the citizens of the former Soviet Union. They have first hand experience on this very topic.
2006-07-03 13:59:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋