436
Comments (26)
sorted by:
12
marishiten 12 points ago +12 / -0

Okay, seriously. Like SERIOUSLY. This is a joke.

These fucking morons haven't taken a SINGLE civics class and they're in positions of power in the most powerful government the world has ever seen.

The doctrine of the "right to travel" actually encompasses three separate rights, of which two have been notable for the uncertainty of their textual support. The first is the right of a citizen to move freely between states, a right venerable for its longevity, but still lacking a clear doctrinal basis.1858 The second, expressly addressed by the first sentence of Article IV, provides a citizen of one State who is temporarily visiting another state the "Privileges and Immunities" of a citizen of the latter state.1859 The third is the right of a new arrival to a state, who establishes citizenship in that state, to enjoy the same rights and benefits as other state citizens. This right is most often invoked in challenges to durational residency requirements, which require that persons reside in a state for a specified period of time before taking advantage of the benefits of that state's citizenship.

1858 Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). "For the purposes of this case, we need not identify the source of [the right to travel] in the text of the Constitution. The right of free ingress and regress to and from' neighboring states which was expressly mentioned in the text of the Article of Confederation, may simply have been conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created."' Id. at 501 (citations omitted).

1859 Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 168, 180 (1868) ("without some provision . . . removing from citizens of each State the disabilities of alienage in other States, and giving them equality of privilege with citizens of those States, the Republic would have constituted little more than a league of States; it would not have constituted the Union which now exists.").

The Right To Travel is listed in the United States Constitution. The 14th amendment.

it cannot be restricted and was designed to allow FREE TRAVEL UNFETTERED BETWEEN ANY STATE IN THE UNION.

That means the Government CANNOT impose restrictions and regulations on traveling between states. AKA. An airplane. Domestic Travel.

These people are fucking an embarrassment. SovCits can prove them wrong and they're FUCKING RETARDED. We have people that are lower IQ than SovCits in government right now

4
jerrycan111 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ha. Now do the election

3
Unsilent 3 points ago +3 / -0

Explain the real ID requirement then.

7
macrolinx 7 points ago +7 / -0

I WATCHED a guy walk into an airport with no id, no luggage of any kind, and some cash. He talked to the AA counter, picked a place to fly to and bought a ticket. Then he went through TSA security. They did "extra checks", but ultimately ended up having to let him through. I don't believe that they can ACTUALLY keep you from flying without an ID.

edit: found this on the TSA site

In the event you arrive at the airport without valid identification, because it is lost or at home, you may still be allowed to fly. The TSA officer may ask you to complete an identity verification process which includes collecting information such as your name, current address, and other personal information to confirm your identity. If your identity is confirmed, you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint. You will be subject to additional screening, to include a patdown and screening of carry-on property.

You will not be allowed to enter the security checkpoint if your identity cannot be confirmed, you choose to not provide proper identification or you decline to cooperate with the identity verification process.

TSA recommends that you arrive at least two hours in advance of your flight time.

3
crazyjackel 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lawyers.

8
Moebius 8 points ago +8 / -0

Won't matter to me. Unless it's a fuckin' EMERGENCY, I'll NEVER fly Again...

$1500 fine 'at the discretion' of some fat ass TSA Nazi...pffffft....

1
Skyrison 1 point ago +1 / -0

show me ONE example of where tsa stopped a "terrorist" or made us more secure over the past 15 years? come on...fucking SHOW ME lol

4
plasssticman 4 points ago +4 / -0

Buttguy will single handedly destroy the travel industry, a feat only 9/11 could attempt.

4
Stallion 4 points ago +4 / -0

Kim's comment is priceless

4
justwow 4 points ago +4 / -0

First: why? For a fake pandemic. Those at risk should take precautions. Period.

Re: PCR tests. First, this is a very invasive test. Second, I understand that it collects your DNA.60 Minutest itself published a piece on military related China co trying to collect Americans' DNA. This raises big questions: where will your DNA data go? Who has access to it? Where will it be stored? Do you trust anyone w your DNA?

Apparently the goal of collecting DNA is basically controlling healthcare in future (look up 60 m article). Real quesitons here is: what is the fucking point of this invasive test? Biden himself said today, Wear Masks, Get Tested.

Why get tested? Nope.

3
RandoBudster 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sure, let's bankrupt the Airlines with millions of false positives.

3
UnauthorizedCaranx 3 points ago +3 / -0

He just wants to see mens assholes as they get swabbed.

2
TearofLys 2 points ago +2 / -0

He is going to bankrupt the airlines.

1
RustedRage 1 point ago +1 / -0

Um, it's Mayor Buttplug, thank you very much.

1
DomTullipso 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm wondering what that will do for my work travel

1
Trumpsta 1 point ago +1 / -0

Telling Mayor Cheat to suck a dick is like telling a fat kid to eat cake.

1
tfinley 1 point ago +1 / -0

How stupid can ya get???

1
henri_derelicte 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is he insane? There is no reason to require that for domestic travel. Moreover, there is no reason to single out the airlines. If they’re going to require negative tests to fly, then they should require negative tests for Amtrak and the buses

4
marishiten 4 points ago +4 / -0

Mayor Pete is targeting Airlines because they are private companies and are the only ones who can actually restrict travel. Not only does it serve many people in traveling, if he tried to do that via driving or whatever, it'd be a huge issue and he knows that the states wouldn't comply.

The airlines aren't going to comply either though. They're hurting for money. Which might be the point. Mayor Pete of Faggotsville might be trying to bankrupt the airlines so the government can buy them out and just own air travel. Then they decide who gets to leave the country or not.

Someone needs to ask Sissy Pete if illegal aliens are getting swabbed for COVID before ILLEGALLY entering the United States. Shouldn't they be tested? And if they come back positive, shouldn't they be removed and quarantined? Oh, that's right, you need voters.

1
henri_derelicte 1 point ago +1 / -0

They won’t be able to implement restrictions on driving across state lines. They lack the manpower to set up checkpoints at each and every road crossing state lines.

But what’s confusing about the Biden regime’s new orders and proposals for air travel is that the airline industry appears to have a good handle on things. Masks were mandated on flights and in airports for months. Airlines are confident enough in their ventilation and filtration systems that they are mostly no longer blocking off the middle seats.

2
marishiten 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not even Canada requires COVID tests to fly domestically.

1
henri_derelicte 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sure, but Canada convinced (more likely coerced) their airlines to suspend flights to Mexico and the Caribbean so people can’t go on vacations. I fear the Biden regime may implement a similar restriction.

2
ShitOfPeace 2 points ago +2 / -0

Don't give them any more ideas.

1
snuggs316 1 point ago +1 / -0

yep, city buses and subways....

1
findthewarmspot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Looks like I’m now a Jehova’s Witness.

1
Perhelion 1 point ago +1 / -0

Your title...πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚ I mean, you can’t threaten this man with a good time 🀣🀣🀣