> The Constitution's Article IV, which protects the rights of citizens in different states, has been interpreted as including the right to free movement between states

How is this remotely relevant? Is this AI slop?

▲

notfromhere a day ago | parent [-]

if you have the right to travel between internal states then there should be no reason you can't travel to other sovereign states.

▲

slt2021 a day ago | parent | next [-]

Most importantly, no liberty of US citizens shall be limited without due process.

This bill would allow State Dept (neocons Marco Rubio who just traveled to Israel and met their prime minister) a unilateral ability to revoke visas/passports of anyone without any due process, just through Marco Rubio’s discretion

	▲	JumpCrisscross a day ago \| parent [-]
		> bill would allow State Dept…a unilateral ability to revoke visas/passports of anyone without any due process The bill absolutely presents due process issues, at least for American citizens. (Visas are more complicated.) My point is the other references are hodgepodges of hallucinations.

▲

JumpCrisscross a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> if you have the right to travel between internal states

The relevant cases are Corfield and Paul [1].

They restrict states. Not the federal government. And since 1926, “the presidential administration” has explicitly had the power to “deny or revoke passports for foreign policy or national security reasons at any time.”

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Un...