right to travel in pennsylvania

• Chapter List
• Testimonials
• Join Luke Unfiltered
• Enter Luke Unfiltered
• Members Area
• Live Call-In Show
• Luke Unfiltered Forum
• Members Only Store
• Apocalypse Survival Training
• Travel & Escape Hacking
• Change Media University
• Member Support
• Edit Your Profile

Select Page

U.S. Supreme Court Says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Roads

Posted by Jeffrey Phillips | Jul 21, 2015 |

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. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”

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. 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.” –

Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”

Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “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. . .”

Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. 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). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.”

Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.”

Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “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. App. 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. 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.”

House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “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. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.

Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.”

Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. 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. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159;

Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.”

-American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – 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. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.”

-International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’”

-City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 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 Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.”

Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…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. 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. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –

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. “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. 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. 22. “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). 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. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “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. “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. A. 2d 639. “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. “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. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” –

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “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. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.”

(Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court,

Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’

Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. “Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases.” Id., at 197.

Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “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. at page 187. “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. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “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. 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.

Cecchi v. Lindsay, 75 Atl. 376, 377, 1 Boyce (Del.) 185. Automotive vehicles are lawful means of conveyance and have equal rights upon the streets with horses and carriages.

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. 26, 28-29. …automobiles are lawful vehicles and have equal rights on the highways with horses and carriages. Daily v. Maxwell, 133 S.W. 351, 354.

Matson v. Dawson, 178 N.W. 2d 588, 591. 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.

Draffin v. Massey, 92 S.E.2d 38, 42. Persons may lawfully ride in automobiles, as they may lawfully ride on bicycles. Doherty v. Ayer, 83 N.E. 677, 197 Mass. 241, 246;

Molway v. City of Chicago, 88 N.E. 485, 486, 239 Ill. 486; Smiley v. East St. Louis Ry. Co., 100 N.E. 157, 158. “A soldier’s personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods[.]’

U.S. v Bomar, C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235” 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94. “[I]t is a jury question whether … an automobile … is a motor vehicle[.]”

United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983). Other right to use an automobile cases: –

EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 –

TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 – WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 – CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 – THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 – U.S. VS. 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. Some citations may be paraphrased.

This article first appeared on SomeNextLevelShit.com and was authored by Jeffrey Phillips.

Sign up on lukeunfiltered.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com .

About The Author

Jeffrey Phillips

Join we are change.

• Facebook 572.5k Followers
• X 466k Followers
• YouTube 870k Followers
• Instagrm 130k Followers

You have Successfully Subscribed!

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

It is unconstitutional for a state to tax people selling religious merchandise.

U.S. Supreme Court

Murdock v. Pennsylvania

Argued March 10, 11, 1943

Decided May 3, 1943*

319 U.S. 105

1. A municipal ordinance which, as construed and applied, requires religious colporteurs to pay a license tax as a condition to the pursuit of their activities, is invalid under the Federal Constitution as a denial of freedom of speech, press and religion. Pp. 319 U. S. 108 -110.

2. The mere fact that the religious literature is "sold", rather than "donated" does not transform the activities of the colporteur into a commercial enterprise. P. 319 U. S. 111 .

3. Upon the record in these cases, it cannot be said that "Jehovah's Witnesses" were engaged in a commercial, rather than in a religious, venture. P. 319 U. S. 111 .

4. A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution. P. 319 U. S. 113 .

5. The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise. P. 319 U. S. 114 .

6. That the ordinance is "nondiscriminatory," in that it applies also to peddlers of wares and merchandise, is immaterial. The liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment are in a preferred position. P. 319 U. S. 115 .

7. Since the privilege in question is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution, and exists independently of state authority, the inquiry as to whether the State has given something for which it can ask a return is irrelevant. P. 319 U. S. 115 .

8. A community may not suppress, or the State tax, the dissemination of views because they are unpopular, annoying, or distasteful. P. 319 U. S. 116 .

Page 319 U. S. 106

9. The assumption that the ordinance has been construed to apply only to solicitation from house to house cannot sustain it, since it is not narrowly drawn to prevent or control abuses or evil arising from that particular type of activity. P. 319 U. S. 117 .

149 Pa.Super. 175, 27 A.2d 666, reversed.

CERTIORARI, 318 U.S. 748, to review affirmances of orders in eight cases refusing to allow appeals from judgments and sentences for violations of a municipal ordinance.

• Opinions & Dissents
• Copy Citation

Get free summaries of new US Supreme Court opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

Protect Your Trip »

Best places to visit in pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania features cities large and small, foodie spots, sports hubs, scenic state parks and more. Plus, the Keystone State experiences all four seasons, meaning you can pick your favorite time to visit. U.S. News considered sights, culture, adventurous pursuits and accessibility, in addition to expert and user feedback, to decide the best places to visit in Pennsylvania. Have a favorite spot? Vote for your top Pennsylvania destination below to help us determine next year's list.

The Poconos

Philadelphia, ricketts glen state park, lehigh valley, valley forge, delaware water gap, lake wallenpaupack.

Hershey is known as "The Sweetest Place on Earth" – and for good reason. Here, you'll find Hershey's Chocolate World, where you can take a free tour of the facility to see how Hershey's chocolate and candy are made. Once you've satisfied your sweet tooth, head next door to Hersheypark to enjoy more than 70 chocolate-themed attractions designed for thrill-seekers of all ages. For a more laid-back vacation, visit ZooAmerica North American Wildlife Park to see the 200-plus animals or Hershey Gardens to stroll through its 23 flower-filled acres (don't miss the rose garden's 3,000 roses if you're visiting during the summer months).

History buffs will love Gettysburg. Travelers can tour the roughly 6,000-acre Gettysburg National Military Park (the site of the Civil War's bloodiest battle) and check out other historical attractions, such as the Jennie Wade House (where the only civilian casualty from the Battle of Gettysburg died) and the Eisenhower National Historic Site (a farm that once belonged to former President Dwight D. Eisenhower). Those who prefer a spookier glimpse of Gettysburg's past can sign up for a ghost tour. After sightseeing, visit an antiques store to find a piece of war memorabilia to take home as a souvenir.

An up-and-coming foodie destination, Pittsburgh woos travelers with restaurants that serve everything from Polish staples to mouthwatering burgers. In addition to eating your way through the Steel City, you'll want to visit the Andy Warhol Museum to see its extensive collection of the late pop art legend's work or head to the Senator John Heinz History Center for a wide array of Pittsburgh-related exhibits. Also save time for a Pittsburgh Pirates baseball game (or a tour) at PNC Park and a ride on the Duquesne Incline, which takes passengers to the top of Mount Washington.

Whether you're looking for a relaxing getaway with your significant other, a vacation full of nonstop adventure or something in between, the Poconos have you covered. This mountain range in northeastern Pennsylvania is home to several state parks featuring forests, waterfalls, lakes and streams, making it an ideal place to hike, ride horses, swim, hunt and camp in summer. Plus, the Pocono Mountains draw skiers and snowboarders in droves in winter thanks to their more than 185 slopes and trails. Whenever you choose to visit, plan on staying at one of the Poconos' luxurious resorts , all-inclusive lodgings or charming inns.

Philly is one of America's most notable historical destinations thanks to top sights like the Liberty Bell (which abolitionists, women's suffrage supporters and other groups have used in their causes as a symbol of liberty) and Independence Hall (where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were debated and signed). What's more, the city offers something for travelers of all ages: Kids will enjoy the Please Touch Museum and the Philadelphia Zoo (one of the best zoos in the country ), while adults can stroll through the Reading Terminal Market and admire Rittenhouse Square. Don't forget to try a classic Philly cheesesteak before you go.

Bordered by the Delaware River to the east, New Hope exudes both scenic beauty and small-town charm. Nature lovers can stroll through the meadows, forests and ponds at Bowman's Hill Wildflower Preserve, or follow a historical canal towpath in Delaware Canal State Park. Meanwhile, the town's quaint Main Street is home to architectural treasures like the Parry Mansion Museum, as well as a variety of boutiques. And don't let its small size fool you; New Hope punches above its weight when it comes to top-notch riverside dining options and irresistible accommodations, which range from picture-perfect inns to luxurious carriage houses.

Ricketts Glen State Park is one of the state's most picturesque locales. Featuring more than 13,000 acres, this impressive state park in Pennsylvania's Columbia, Luzerne and Sullivan counties is home to the Glens Natural Area, a National Natural Landmark. It also offers 26 miles of hiking trails that take you through centuries-old forests and around stunning rock formations. If you only have time to trek one of the park's 11 trails, travelers recommend choosing the Falls Trail. This 7.2-mile loop travels past 21 of the park's 22 free-falling waterfalls, including Ganoga Falls (Ricketts Glen's tallest waterfall).

This valley in eastern Pennsylvania – which comprises larger cities like Allentown and Bethlehem, plus smaller towns like Easton – is packed with things to do. History buffs can learn about Lehigh Valley's Colonial days at historical sights like the 1750 Smithy and the Bachmann Publick House. Outdoor enthusiasts will find ample opportunities for hiking, biking, skiing and white-water rafting. Families will love visiting Easton's Crayola Experience and Allentown's Dorney Park. And for adults, there are dozens of breweries, distilleries and wineries to check out. For even more ambiance, arrive in fall to go leaf peeping and apple picking.

Lancaster is home to the nation's oldest Amish communities, making it an ideal place to disconnect and discover this unique way of life. Lancaster's Amish buggy rides and impressive farmers markets are popular with travelers of all ages, and visitors can learn more about the Amish lifestyle at the Amish Experience and The Amish Farm and House. Other must-dos in the area include the family-friendly Dutch Wonderland theme park, which wins praise for its variety of rides for younger kids. And don't miss shopping at the area's outlets and taking a tour of a local brewery.

Visit Valley Forge National Historical Park to spend your next vacation learning about American history. The village served as the winter encampment for former President George Washington and the Continental Army from 1777 to 1778. You can tour the encampment to see sights like the United States National Memorial Arch, Artillery Park and Washington's Headquarters. The park also offers ranger programs during the warmer months, plus 35 miles of trails for hiking, biking and horseback riding. When you need a break from the village's rich history, enjoy some retail therapy at the nearby King of Prussia Mall, which features more than 450 stores.

Lovers of the great outdoors flock to the Delaware Water Gap each summer to hike and admire the area's green forests and waterfalls. Travelers can also rent canoes or kayaks and take to the water, fish at numerous lakes and streams or swim at Milford and Smithfield beaches. For those who'd rather stay on land, the roughly 70,000-acre Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area offers ample opportunities to bike, hunt and go rock climbing. Visit in winter to take advantage of cold-weather activities like cross-country skiing, snowshoeing and ice climbing.

If you're eager to spend some time in and on water, choose Lake Wallenpaupack as your next vacation destination. This man-made lake in the Poconos is one of the largest in the state, occupying 5,700 acres. Popular summer pursuits here include swimming, water skiing, boating and kayaking, while winter activities range from ice skating to snowshoeing to ice fishing. Lake Wallenpaupack also features six recreation areas, so if you need a break from the water, head ashore to enjoy land-based activities like hiking, camping and snowmobiling.

Vote to Add these Destinations to the Rankings

Allegheny National Forest

State College

You May Be Interested In

Best Places to Visit in Virginia

Best Places to Visit in New York State in 2024

Best Places to Visit in Maine

Best Places to Hike in the USA

Best Family Vacations in the USA for 2024

Best small towns to visit in the usa.

If you make a purchase from our site, we may earn a commission. This does not affect the quality or independence of our editorial content.

Recommended

The 26 Best Beach Resorts in the World

Marisa Méndez|Erin Vasta|Rachael Hood|Catriona Kendall September 5, 2024

30 Fun Fall Weekend Getaways for 2024

Holly Johnson August 29, 2024

The 19 Best Fall Family Vacations for 2024

Amanda Norcross August 27, 2024

The 28 Best Water Parks in the U.S. for 2024

Holly Johnson|Timothy J. Forster May 8, 2024

The 18 Best Napa Valley Wineries to Visit in 2024

Lyn Mettler|Sharael Kolberg April 23, 2024

The 25 Best Beaches on the East Coast for 2024

Timothy J. Forster|Sharael Kolberg April 19, 2024

The 50 Best Hotels in the USA 2024

Christina Maggitas February 6, 2024

The 32 Most Famous Landmarks in the World

Gwen Pratesi|Timothy J. Forster February 1, 2024

9 Top All-Inclusive Resorts in Florida for 2024

Gwen Pratesi|Amanda Norcross January 5, 2024

24 Top All-Inclusive Resorts in the U.S. for 2024

Erin Evans January 4, 2024

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

Q: How far does my constitutional "right to travel" go?

I got a ticket for my inspection stickers expiring a month prior. That officer said I didn't have to pay any money. There is also no dollar amount written on the original citation so I took it as a warning like the cop said, I have 30 days to get it inspected. Last week I got a letter saying I did not respond in 10 days and I have to pay $164 or lose my driving privileges so I paid it. Now I feel like I been robbed. The cop was in front of my and did a u-turn to get behind me... I feel my right to travel has been violated and I seek at minimum my $164 back.

• Criminal Law Lawyer
• Licensed in Pennsylvania
• (484) 886-4271
• Email Lawyer
• View Website

A: It does not violate your constitutional right to travel. You can still travel but if you choose to do it in a motorvehicle you must follow lawful regulations. There is no constitutional right to drive.

• Wyomissing, PA
• (800) 367-5298

A: There is a consitutional right to "liberty" but "travel" isn't specified in the constituition. You have a right to walk, but for instance public drunkeness means you can be stopped Your right on the road is subject to regulation. For instance you can only walk on the road in limited circumstances. Likewise bike, horse, etc. Motorcycles also have registration requirements. Maybe you didn't look at the ticket front and back? You can appeal the fine but that is a ton of effort.

Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.

The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.

Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

• Ethics & Leadership
• Fact-Checking
• Media Literacy
• The Craig Newmark Center
• Reporting & Editing
• Ethics & Trust
• Tech & Tools
• Business & Work
• Educators & Students
• Training Catalog
• Custom Teaching
• For ACES Members
• All Categories
• Broadcast & Visual Journalism
• Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
• In-newsroom
• Memphis, Tenn.
• Minneapolis, Minn.
• St. Petersburg, Fla.
• Washington, D.C.
• Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
• Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
• Ethics Training
• Ethics Articles
• Get Ethics Advice
• Fact-Checking Articles
• IFCN Grants
• International Fact-Checking Day
• Teen Fact-Checking Network
• International
• Media Literacy Training
• MediaWise Resources
• Ambassadors
• MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

Amid proposals for travel vaccine mandates, is there a right to unfettered travel in the US?

Legal experts say the constitution generally recognizes a right to travel between the states. but it’s not an absolute right..

With President Joe Biden moving to tighten vaccine requirements, some Republicans have pushed back, arguing that Biden’s policies unduly constrain personal liberty.

During a Sept. 16  interview  on the conservative channel Newsmax, Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., focused on the prospect that Biden could make vaccination a requirement for interstate travel, such as on a plane. (Biden has not issued such an order, though one of his first acts as president was requiring masks for interstate travel.)

“This is a medical apartheid plain and simple,” Cawthorn said, adding, “They want to start shutting down air travel to these people to get around the country? I think that’s actually a constitutional violation, because you actually have a constitutionally protected right to free, unrestricted travel within the United States of America.”

Legal experts say Cawthorn is right that the Constitution recognizes a general right to travel between the states. However, they added that this right is traditionally balanced against other, competing rights — including public health and safety needs — and those other rights are often granted greater deference in the courts. (Cawthorn’s office did not respond to an inquiry.)

“There is a constitutional ‘right to travel,’ but it isn’t absolute,” said Wendy E. Parmet, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law and Northeastern University.

On one hand, several portions of the Constitution are generally considered to support freedom of travel between the states,  said  Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor. They include the  Privileges and Immunities Clause  — which says that “the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states” — as well as a related provision in the  14th Amendment .

On the other hand, Volokh and every other legal analyst we contacted agreed that this right is not unlimited.

While the Supreme Court “has recognized a right to interstate travel” in such cases as  Saenz v. Roe  from 1999, “it’s not an unfettered right,” said Jonathan H. Adler, a Case Western Reserve University law professor. “The regulation of interstate travel — think Transportation Security Administration measures — don’t necessarily infringe upon that right.”

Indeed, the TSA, a federal agency created in the aftermath of 9/11, has  myriad restrictions  on what passengers can bring aboard a domestic flight, from alcoholic beverages over 140 proof to ammunition to axes. And those are just the items beginning with the letter A. (These rules even apply to flights within a state.)

The TSA also requires a valid form of identification, an X-ray scan of both checked and carry-on bags, and a scan of passengers by a metal detector, all in the name of public safety. Together, these conditions make travel anything but “free” and “unrestricted,” yet they are constitutionally protected practices.

The federal regulatory role of interstate travel springs from the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which  gives  Congress the power “to regulate commerce … among the several states.”

“Since interstate travel is an area where states might not be able to cooperate and might discriminate against residents of other states, the power over interstate travel is in some ways given to the federal government,” said Kermit Roosevelt, a University of Pennsylvania law professor.

Public health concerns have long been considered an area where the federal government can legitimately exercise its power over interstate travel, legal analysts said.

For instance, the Supreme Court decided in the 1877 case  Railroad Co. v. Husen  that a state “may exclude from its limits persons afflicted by contagious or infectious diseases.”

That said, rulings in recent pandemic-related cases suggest that the courts, and especially conservative judges, are less likely than in the past to embrace a public-health justification for new government regulation. So it’s unclear whether today’s courts would uphold a vaccine mandate as a condition for interstate travel.

Such a policy “is untested,” Parmet said. “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention arguably has such authority, but neither the Public Health Services Act nor CDC regulations are spot on, and courts might well say it doesn’t.”

At the very least, a vaccine requirement for interstate travel might need to have certain exceptions, such as religious and medical exemptions, Adler said. “It’s hard to know whether a specific measure would likely be upheld without seeing the particulars,” he said.

Still, Ilya Somin, a George Mason University law professor who supports limits on federal power, acknowledged that there’s a strong legal case for requiring COVID-19 vaccines for travel on public-health grounds. Striking down such a mandate for plane travel would require a major reversal of longstanding interpretations by the courts, he said.

This article was originally  published by PolitiFact , which is part of the Poynter Institute. It is republished here with permission. See the sources here and more from PolitiFact here .

The American Journalism Project takes on its biggest initiative yet — covering underserved LA communities.

The project will initially focus on growing and knitting together existing nonprofits, with startups coming in the future

Opinion | Looking back at Tuesday night’s presidential debate, including ABC News’ solid performance

The moderators shined in doing something the first 2024 debate moderators didn’t do: a little fact-checking in real time

Fact check: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s first 2024 presidential debate

Here’s how the candidates’ answers stood up to the facts.

LIVE: Fact-checking the presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump

ABC News anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis will moderate the debate, which starts at 9 p.m. Eastern

Amid urban and news business declines, a reporter finds hope at the end of the line

In a new memoir, an old-school Detroit newsman documents urban recovery and how he has survived and thrived in the digital age

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.

Advertisement

Supported by

The Right to Travel in a Post-Roe World

In a concurring opinion last month, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh said the Constitution did not allow states to stop women from traveling to get abortions. But the issue is more complicated than that.

• Share full article

By Adam Liptak

WASHINGTON — Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh signed the recent majority opinion that overruled Roe v. Wade. He also issued a 12-page concurring opinion, writing only for himself. He wanted to discuss, he wrote, “the future implications” of the decision.

“Some of the other abortion-related legal questions raised by today’s decision are not especially difficult as a constitutional matter,” he wrote. “For example, may a state bar a resident of that state from traveling to another state to obtain an abortion? In my view, the answer is no based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.”

A few hours later, Rory Little , a law professor at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law, noted a bit of irony on Twitter : “Justice Kavanaugh votes to overrule abortion protections because not specifically mentioned in the Constitution — and then his concurrence relies on an unwritten ‘constitutional right to interstate travel.’”

You will indeed search the Constitution in vain for the word travel, just as you will not find the word abortion. And though some form of a constitutional right to travel is almost uniformly accepted, the Supreme Court has struggled to say exactly where to find it or precisely how to define it.

“We need not identify the source of that particular right in the text of the Constitution,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in a 1999 decision of “the right of a citizen of one state to enter and to leave another state.”

Similarly, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. wrote for the court in 1969 that “we have no occasion to ascribe the source of this right to travel interstate to a particular constitutional provision.”

Justice Kavanaugh, for his part, cited no precedents or constitutional provisions for his statement that a state may not “bar a resident of that state from traveling to another state to obtain an abortion.”

The real-world issue, in any event, is not whether women seeking abortions would be stopped at the state’s border but rather what would happen afterward — to the women, to those who helped them travel and to out-of-state abortion providers.

Those questions, a timely draft article cited in the dissent said, present a complicated and contested array of issues. The article, “The New Abortion Battleground,” which is to be published in The Columbia Law Review, was written by three law professors: David S. Cohen of Drexel University, Greer Donley of the University of Pittsburgh and Rachel Rebouché of Temple University.

The prospect of states trying to stop abortions beyond their own borders is not fanciful, Professor Rebouché said.

“We should be worried that states will start throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks,” she said. “There is an unknown universe of what’s ahead.”

Missouri legislators have twice considered, but so far have not adopted, bills that would restrict residents’ ability to obtain abortions in other states. The more recent of them borrowed from the innovation of the Texas law that succeeded in banning most abortions in that state after six weeks of pregnancy — 10 months before the court overruled Roe.

Like the Texas law, the Missouri bill relied on private enforcement through civil lawsuits, shielding it from many legal challenges. Anti-abortion groups have also drafted model laws that reach beyond state borders, and abortion rights groups fear a wave of such legislation.

Even the prospect of such statutes seems to have had a chilling effect. In Montana, for instance, Planned Parenthood clinics said recently that they would require proof of residency for women seeking abortion pills.

“It is going to get incredibly messy and complicated,” Professor Donley said, adding that Justice Kavanaugh’s statement offered “literally no protection” to out-of-state doctors and clinics who provide abortions to women from states where the procedure is illegal.

Justice Kavanaugh’s description of the scope of the right to travel, which responded to a question in the dissent, was oddly limited, said Seth Kreimer , a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of two foundational law review articles exploring the right to travel in the context of abortion.

The right to interstate travel, he said, “is fairly solidly rooted in constitutional structure and longstanding constitutional practice.” But that is only part of the puzzle.

“Read closely,” Professor Kreimer said of Justice Kavanaugh’s statement, “he may not even suggest protection against prosecuting the resident upon her return — or seeking to sanction doctors in sanctuary states either by prosecution or damage actions.”

Had Justice Kavanaugh wanted to cite a Supreme Court precedent that seems both apt and expansive, he might have chosen Bigelow v. Virginia , a 1975 decision that overturned the conviction of a newspaper editor who published an advertisement in Virginia for abortion services in New York when abortions were illegal in Virginia.

The case turned on the First Amendment, but the author of the majority opinion, Justice Harry A. Blackmun, made some broader points, too.

“The Virginia Legislature could not have regulated the advertiser’s activity in New York, and obviously could not have proscribed the activity in that state,” he wrote. “Neither could Virginia prevent its residents from traveling to New York to obtain those services or, as the state conceded, prosecute them for going there. Virginia possessed no authority to regulate the services provided in New York.”

Justice Kavanaugh’s statement was much narrower, Professor Kreimer said. “Kavanaugh hasn’t committed himself to protection of anything beyond ‘travel,’” he said. “So, while robust protection could emerge, it’s not an outcome that one can rely upon.”

Adam Liptak covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002. More about Adam Liptak

Watch CBS News

President Biden, VP Harris, former President Trump all visit Flight 93 National Memorial

By Mike Darnay , Christopher DeRose

Updated on: September 11, 2024 / 6:44 PM EDT / CBS Pittsburgh

SHANKSVILLE, Pa. (KDKA) -- Wednesday marks 23 years since the tragic events of September 11, 2001.  President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump all visited the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, on Wednesday to honor the lives lost that day.

The Flight 93 National Memorial in rural Somerset County, a little more than an hour from Pittsburgh, marks the place where United Airlines Flight 93 crashed after passengers and crew voted to fight back against a group of hijackers.  

United Airlines Flight 93 was one of four planes hijacked that morning. Two crashed into the World Trade Center towers in New York City and a third crashed into the Pentagon. It's believed the terrorists aboard Flight 93 intended to target the U.S. Capitol building. 

Forty Flight 93 passengers and crew members lost their lives that day. 

Sheryl Stoll, who came out Wednesday, as she does almost every year to honor her cousin, Flight 93 Captain Jason M. Dahl, says he was a hero.

"Jason would say to family, definitely to me, if he ever had to take his plane in, he prayed that it would be in an unpopulated area, just an open field. And even when I say it today, it gives me goosebumps because that's exactly what happened," said Stoll.

Another family member who was there Wednesday morning was Gordon Felt. His brother, Edward Porter Felt, was on the flight that fateful morning.

Gordon says that he hopes the memory of his brother and the other passengers and crew that were lost never fade from memory.

"Sept. 11 is a difficult day. The scab is torn again. Thinking back to all we lost, my brother, our family, the family of the 40 heroes that are remembered in a very public way every year. But at the same time, it is also encouraging that there is still interest, that we are still talking about Sept. 11, and people are still coming out to the memorial," Felt added.

Public events held at the Flight 93 National Memorial 

The service started at 9:45 a.m., but folks started showing up as early as 7 a.m. to reflect and remember the 40 people on Flight 93 who lost their lives while trying to prevent the terrorists on board from flying the airplane ultimately into the U.S. Capitol building. As each person's name was read, two bells tolled in their memory.

The families of the victims laid a wreath at the crash site.

"The character of the passengers and crew showed who they were that day by putting others first," said Rev. Daniel Lawrence of the Pennsylvania State Police. "Their individual and cooperative actions that day saved many innocent, unsuspecting lives from tragedy. Today, there are individuals here from all professions, all walks of life, families, and backgrounds, but the one thing we all have in common is this: We're part of humanity."

Every speaker asked that folks not only continue to keep remembering, but schools keep teaching the stories and lessons from Sept. 11, so that we as a country never forget. 

Biden and Harris visit Flight 93 National Memorial

President Biden and Vice President Harris arrived in Pennsylvania  to participate in a wreath-laying ceremony at the Flight 93 National Memorial Wednesday. 

In a statement, Mr. Biden said, in part, that "the heroes of Flight 93, who confronted terror with absolute courage and undoubtedly saved more American lives."

Before heading to Pennsylvania, Mr. Biden and Harris participated in a commemoration ceremony at ground zero in New York City at 8:30 a.m.

In a statement, Harris said, in part, that "we should all reflect on what binds us together as one: the greatest privilege on Earth, the pride and privilege of being an American."

President Biden and Vice President Harris laid a wreath at the memorial site just after 1 p.m. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was also expected to attend. 

Following the ceremony, Mr. Biden and Harris traveled to Washington, D.C. for a similar ceremony at the Pentagon. 

Trump also visits Flight 93 National Memorial

Former President Trump also came to the Flight 93 National Memorial.  Trump took part in a private wreath-laying ceremony. 

Before coming to Pennsylvania, Trump also appeared at the 9/11 memorial ceremony in New York City. 

• Pennsylvania
• Shanksville
• KDKA-TV Morning News
• Kamala Harris
• Donald Trump
• Remembering 9/11

Mike Darnay is a digital producer and photojournalist at CBS Pittsburgh. Mike has also written and produced content for Vox Media and the Mon Valley Independent. He often covers overnight breaking news, the Pittsburgh Steelers and high school sports.

Featured Local Savings

More from cbs news.

Volunteers gather in the National Cemetery of the Alleghenies for a day of service

Democratic, Republican National Committee chairmen share insights ahead of presidential debate

Westmoreland County pizza shop owner thanks first responders on 9/11 with free pie

TSA agents finding more guns at Pittsburgh International Airport

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Newsletters
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

ABC Presidential Debate

• Key moments
• Live updates
• Taylor Swift endorsement
• ABC moderators
• Debate rules
• How to watch

Biden, Harris and Trump visit Sept. 11 sites to mark 2001 attacks

By Andrea Shalal and Nandita Bose

NEW YORK (Reuters) -President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump made a rare joint appearance on Wednesday at the New York City site that marks the Sept. 11 plane attacks in 2001 that killed nearly 3,000 people.

Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate and Trump, her Republican rival in the Nov. 5 U.S. presidential election, shook hands and exchanged a few words despite their contentious debate the night before, then lined up for the commemoration. Trump's running mate, Senator JD Vance, also attended.

There were no formal remarks at the "ground zero" site where planes brought down the World Trade Center's twin towers. Instead, wives, husbands, sisters, brothers and grandchildren read out the names of family members killed 23 years ago.

The annual rite marks the suicide attacks by al Qaeda Islamist militants who flew two planes into the World Trade Center and another into the Pentagon. A fourth plane went down in a Pennsylvania field after passengers stormed the cockpit.

"Richard J. O'Connor. We will always love and miss you," a red-headed boy said of his grandfather, who was killed at the World Trade Center.

A bagpipe and drum processional was accompanied by New York City's fire and police departments and Port Authority honor guards. The national anthem was performed and moments of silence were held at the times each target was struck.

After New York, Biden and Harris flew to Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where passengers on United Flight 93 overcame the hijackers and the plane crashed in a field, preventing another target from being hit.

At a white marble memorial in the field, Biden gently laid a hand on the wreath to pay his respects to the 40 people killed in the crash. He and Harris were joined by Calvin Wilson, the brother-in-law of Flight 93 co-pilot LeRoy Homer Jr.

The president and vice president spoke with local fire officials at the Shanksville Volunteer Fire Department, pausing for a moment to observe another memorial, erected on an adjacent hill where 40 flags waved in the wind.

There, Biden spoke about the need for the country to return to bipartisan unity and gave a hat to a Trump supporter, who gave him a Trump hat in return, according to spokesperson Andrew Bates.

Biden wore the hat, making for a viral photograph. "Thanks for the support, Joe," the Trump campaign wrote on social media.

Biden and Harris later headed to a memorial at the Pentagon. There, they carried a wreath decorated in red, white and blue, bowed their heads and stood before it for a few moments before "Taps" played.

"On this day 23 years ago, terrorists believed they could break our will and bring us to our knees. They were wrong. They will always be wrong. In the darkest of hours, we found light. And in the face of fear, we came together - to defend our country, and to help one another," Biden said in a statement.

Trump, who visited the Pennsylvania memorial on Wednesday, told Fox News: "It was very, very sad, horrible day. There's never been anything like it."

Biden earlier issued a proclamation honoring those who died as a result of the attacks, as well as the hundreds of thousands of Americans who volunteered for military service afterwards.

"We owe these patriots of the 9/11 Generation a debt of gratitude that we can never fully repay," Biden said, citing deployments to Afghanistan, Iraq and other war zones, as well as the capture and killing of Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal and Nandita Bose; Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu, Susan Heavey, Jeff Mason and Helen Coster; Editing by Heather Timmons and Jonathan Oatis)

Recommended Stories

Harris wants a second presidential debate. trump gives mixed signals..

After a strong debate performance Wednesday against former President Donald Trump, Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign called for a second one to be held in October.

Fact-checking the Harris-Trump debate, Hurricane Francine to make landfall in La., what to expect at the MTV VMAs

Get caught up on this morning’s news: Fact checks from the Harris-Trump debate, Hurricane Francine’s path and more in today’s edition of The Yodel newsletter

Taylor Swift's Kamala Harris endorsement shows how she's honed her political voice — and influence

For years, Swift stayed silent about politics. Today, she'll "Speak Now," thank you very much.

The ‘audio earrings’ Kamala Harris didn’t wear during the debate barely even exist

After Tuesday's presidential debate, predictable conspiracy theories incorrectly suggested that Vice President Kamala Harris was wearing an earpiece.

Trump-Harris presidential debate: Live updates, reaction after candidates clash on abortion, immigration, economy

Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris met for the first time in Philadelphia on Tuesday night.

Harris-Trump debate preview: What the presidential candidates need to accomplish Tuesday night

Debates have very real consequences for the candidates — and that’s especially true for Tuesday’s clash, which may be the only time Harris and Trump collide before voters start casting their ballots.

McDonald's is getting a lot of attention on the campaign trail. Does it matter?

McDonald's has found itself in the middle of political campaigns for years. But this time around, the attention is coming perhaps more intensely than ever and from both sides of the aisle.

Harris has little to say about oil and gas these days. Experts explain why.

Kamala Harris has been quiet about the oil and gas industries on the campaign trail. That's intentional, say industry watchers.

Trump and Harris are both threatening more inflation

Tariffs, deportations, price controls, home buyer subsidies: What they have in common is strong inflationary pressure.

The Fed's independence emerges as a clear dividing line for Harris and Trump

When Donald Trump raised the prospect of having "a say" in Fed actions, he set off a debate between the two presidential campaigns about the autonomy of the central bank.

DNC 2024 live updates: Kamala Harris, accepting Democratic nomination, says 'the future is always worth fighting for'

The Democratic National Convention concludes on Thursday night.

Harris accepts Democratic nomination, FDA approves new COVID-19 vaccines, and 'pommel horse guy' heads to 'DWTS'

Get caught up on this morning’s news: Harris’s DNC speech, ‘pommel horse guy’ on ‘DWTS’ and more in today’s edition of The Yodel newsletter

In DNC speech, Michelle Obama declares 'something wonderfully magical is in the air'

Former first lady Michelle Obama delivered a powerful speech Tuesday to the Democratic National Convention in her hometown of Chicago, where she declared that thanks to the ascendant candidacy of Vice President Kamala Harris, "hope is making a comeback."

Trump's falsehoods show no sign of letting up as campaign enters final stretch

With the dynamics of the 2024 presidential election having dramatically shifted since President Biden dropped out of the race on July 21, former President Donald Trump has looked to blunt Vice President Kamala Harris’s momentum by holding a series of rambling press conferences and interviews.

Cooling inflation raises new challenges for Trump's economic attacks

Cooling inflation has made things more complicated for Donald Trump this week as he tries to counter a polling surge from Kamala Harris.

Shohei Ohtani tracker: Dodgers star reaches 47 HRs, 48 SBs in quest for 50-50 season

The Dodgers star has a new career high in homers.

Aces star A'ja Wilson breaks WNBA single-season scoring record, passing Jewel Lloyd

A'ja Wilson broke Jewel Lloyd's single-season record early on Wednesday night in their matchup with Caitlin Clark and the Indiana Fever.

How to watch 'The Ariel Helwani Show' live from Las Vegas on Friday, Sept. 13

Ariel Helwani will launch the new era of his show live from The Yahoo Sportsbook at The Venetian on Friday afternoon.

Sean 'Diddy' Combs sued by Danity Kane singer Dawn Richard for sexual abuse as federal investigation is ongoing

Danity Kane singer Dawn Richard accuses Diddy of groping her and threatening her life. She also claims to have witnessed him abuse ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura.

This heart condition is 3 times more common than we thought, researchers say

A new study found that atrial fibrillation — an irregular heartbeat that's one of the most common causes of stroke — is more prevalent than previously thought.

• SUBSCRIBE TO EMAIL
•   Weather

Search location by ZIP code

Biden, harris and trump to visit flight 93 memorial in pennsylvania on 9/11.

• Copy Link Copy {copyShortcut} to copy Link copied!

GET LOCAL BREAKING NEWS ALERTS

The latest breaking updates, delivered straight to your email inbox.

President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and former President Donald Trump are visiting the Flight 93 Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, today to honor the victims of the September 11 attacks.

United Airlines Flight 93 was the only plane on September 11 that did not reach its intended target after passengers retook control from hijackers and purposely crashed the plane.

• Hijacking on September 11, 2001: United Airlines Flight 93 was hijacked by four al-Qaeda terrorists on September 11, 2001. It was one of four planes hijacked that day.
• Passengers' Heroic Actions: Passengers and crew attempted to regain control of the plane from the hijackers after learning about the other attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
• Flight Data Recorder: The cockpit voice recorder captured the passengers' struggle with the hijackers and their attempt to forcibly regain control of the plane.
• Crash Site: The plane ultimately crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, killing all 44 passengers and crew, including the hijackers. The intended target was believed to be either the White House or the U.S. Capitol.
• Flight 93 National Memorial: The crash site is now the Flight 93 National Memorial, honoring the 40 passengers and crew who lost their lives. The memorial was dedicated on September 10, 2011, and serves as a place of remembrance and reflection.

Fourteenth Amendment , Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

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. 1 Footnote 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). 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. 2 Footnote Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. (8 Wall.) 168 (1869) ( “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 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.

Durational Residency Requirements

Challenges to durational residency requirements have traditionally been made under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . In 1999, however, the Court approved a doctrinal shift, so that state laws that distinguished between their own citizens, based on how long they had been in the state, would be evaluated instead under the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . 3 Footnote Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489, 502–03 (1999) . The Court did not, however, question the continuing efficacy of the earlier cases.

A durational residency requirement creates two classes of persons: those who have been within the state for the prescribed period and those who have not. 4 Footnote Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 334 (1972) . Because the right to travel is implicated by state distinctions between residents and nonresidents, the relevant constitutional provision is the Privileges and Immunities Clause, Article IV, § 2, cl. 1. But persons who have moved recently, at least from state to state, 5 Footnote Intrastate travel is protected to the extent that the classification fails to meet equal protection standards in some respect. Compare Hadnott v. Amos , 320 F. Supp. 107 (M.D. Ala. 1970) (three-judge court), aff’d. per curiam , 405 U.S. 1035 (1972) , with Arlington County Bd. v. Richards, 434 U.S. 5 (1977) . The same principle applies in the commerce clause cases, in which discrimination may run against in-state as well as out-of-state concerns. Cf. Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison, 340 U.S. 349 (1951) . have exercised a right protected by the Constitution, and the durational residency classification either deters the exercise of that right or penalizes those who have exercised it. 6 Footnote Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629–31, 638 (1969) ; Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330, 338–42 (1972) ; Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250 (1974) ; Jones v. Helms, 452 U.S. 412, 420–21 (1981) . See also Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112, 236–39 (1970) (Justices Brennan, White, and Marshall), and id. at 285–92 (Justices Stewart and Blackmun and Chief Justice Burger). Any such classification is invalid “unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling governmental interest.” 7 Footnote Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 634 (1969) (emphasis by Court); Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365, 375–76 (1971) . The constitutional right to travel has long been recognized, 8 Footnote Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1868) ; Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941) (both cases in context of direct restrictions on travel). The source of the right to travel and the reasons for reliance on the Equal Protection Clause are questions puzzled over and unresolved by the Court. United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 758, 759 (1966) , and id. at 763–64 (Justice Harlan concurring and dissenting), id. at 777 n.3 (Justice Brennan concurring and dissenting); Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 629–31 (1969) , and id. at 671 (Justice Harlan dissenting); San Antonio School Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 31–32 (1973) ; Jones v. Helms, 452 U.S. 412, 417–19 (1981) ; Zobel v. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, 60 & n.6 (1982) , and id. at 66–68 (Justice Brennan concurring), 78-81 (Justice O’Connor concurring). but it is only relatively recently that the strict standard of equal protection review has been applied to nullify durational residency requirements.

Thus, in Shapiro v. Thompson , 9 Footnote 394 U.S. 618 (1969) . durational residency requirements conditioning eligibility for welfare assistance on one year’s residence in the state 10 Footnote The durational residency provision established by Congress for the District of Columbia was also voided. 394 U.S. at 641–42 . were voided. If the purpose of the requirements was to inhibit migration by needy persons into the state or to bar the entry of those who came from low-paying states to higher-paying ones in order to collect greater benefits, the Court said, the purpose was impermissible. 11 Footnote 394 U.S. at 627–33 . Gaddis v. Wyman , 304 F. Supp. 717 (N.D.N.Y. 1969) , aff’d sub nom. Wyman v. Bowens, 397 U.S. 49 (1970) , struck down a provision construed so as to bar only persons who came into the state solely to obtain welfare assistance. If, on the other hand, the purpose was to serve certain administrative and related governmental objectives—the facilitation of the planning of budgets, the provision of an objective test of residency, minimization of opportunity for fraud, and encouragement of early entry of new residents into the labor force—then the requirements were rationally related to the purpose but they were not compelling enough to justify a classification that infringed a fundamental interest. 12 Footnote 394 U.S. at 633–38 . Shapiro was reaffirmed in Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 (1971) (striking down durational residency requirements for aliens applying for welfare assistance), and in Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250 (1974) (voiding requirement of one year’s residency in county as condition to indigent’s receiving nonemergency hospitalization or medical care at county’s expense). When Connecticut and New York reinstituted the requirements, pleading a financial emergency as the compelling state interest, they were summarily rebuffed. Rivera v. Dunn , 329 F. Supp. 554 (D. Conn. 1971) , aff’d per curiam , 404 U.S. 1054 (1972) ; Lopez v. Wyman , Civ. No. 1971-308 (W.D.N.Y. 1971) , aff’d per curiam , 404 U.S. 1055 (1972) . The source of the funds, state or federal, is irrelevant to application of the principle. Pease v. Hansen, 404 U.S. 70 (1971) . In Dunn v. Blumstein , 13 Footnote 405 U.S. 330 (1972) . But see Marston v. Lewis, 410 U.S. 679 (1973) , and Burns v. Fortson, 410 U.S. 686 (1973) . Durational residency requirements of five and seven years respectively for candidates for elective office were sustained in Kanapaux v. Ellisor , 419 U.S. 891 (1974) , and Sununu v. Stark , 420 U.S. 958 (1975) . where the durational residency requirements denied the franchise to newcomers, such administrative justifications were found constitutionally insufficient to justify the classification. 14 Footnote For additional discussion of durational residence as a qualification to vote, see Voter Qualifications, supra . The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was the basis for striking down a California law that limited welfare benefits for California citizens who had resided in the state for less than a year to the level of benefits that they would have received in the state of their prior residence. 15 Footnote Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489, 505 (1999) .

However, a state one-year durational residency requirement for the initiation of a divorce proceeding was sustained in Sosna v. Iowa . 16 Footnote 419 U.S. 393 (1975) . Justices Marshall and Brennan dissented on the merits. Id. at 418 . Although it is not clear what the precise basis of the ruling is, it appears that the Court found that the state’s interest in requiring that those who seek a divorce from its courts be genuinely attached to the state and its desire to insulate divorce decrees from the likelihood of collateral attack justified the requirement. 17 Footnote 419 U.S. at 409 . But the Court also indicated that the plaintiff was not absolutely barred from the state courts, but merely required to wait for access (which was true in the prior cases as well and there held immaterial), and that possibly the state interests in marriage and divorce were more exclusive and thus more immune from federal constitutional attack than were the matters at issue in the previous cases. The Court also did not indicate whether it was using strict or traditional scrutiny. Similarly, durational residency requirements for lower in-state tuition at public colleges have been held constitutionally justifiable, again, however, without a clear statement of reason. 18 Footnote Starns v. Malkerson , 326 F. Supp. 234 (D. Minn. 1970) , aff’d per curiam , 401 U.S. 985 (1971) . Cf. Vlandis v. Kline, 412 U.S. 441, 452 & n.9 (1973) , and id. at 456, 464, 467 (dicta). In Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250, 256 (1974) , the Court, noting the results, stated that “some waiting periods . . . may not be penalties” and thus would be valid. More recently, the Court has attempted to clarify these cases by distinguishing situations where a state citizen is likely to “consume” benefits within a state’s borders (such as the provision of welfare) from those where citizens of other states are likely to establish residency just long enough to acquire some portable benefit, and then return to their original domicile to enjoy them (such as obtaining a divorce decree or paying the in-state tuition rate for a college education). 19 Footnote Saenz v. Roe , 526 U.S. at 505 .

A state scheme for returning to its residents a portion of the income earned from the vast oil deposits discovered within Alaska foundered upon the formula for allocating the dividends; that is, each adult resident received one unit of return for each year of residency subsequent to 1959, the first year of Alaska’s statehood. The law thus created fixed, permanent distinctions between an ever-increasing number of classes of bona fide residents based on how long they had been in the state. The differences between the durational residency cases previously decided did not alter the bearing of the right to travel principle upon the distribution scheme, but the Court’s decision went off on the absence of any permissible purpose underlying the apportionment classification and it thus failed even the rational basis test. 20 Footnote Zobel v. Williams, 457 U.S. 55 (1982) . Somewhat similar was the Court’s invalidation on equal protection grounds of a veterans preference for state employment limited to persons who were state residents when they entered military service; four Justices also thought the preference penalized the right to travel. Attorney General of New York v. Soto-Lopez, 476 U.S. 898 (1986) .

Still unresolved are issues such as durational residency requirements for occupational licenses and other purposes. 21 Footnote La Tourette v. McMaster, 248 U.S. 465 (1919) , upholding a two-year residence requirement to become an insurance broker, must be considered of questionable validity. Durational periods for admission to the practice of law or medicine or other professions have evoked differing responses by lower courts. But this line of cases does not apply to state residency requirements themselves, as distinguished from durational provisions, 22 Footnote E.g. , McCarthy v. Philadelphia Civil Service Comm’n, 424 U.S. 645 (1976) (ordinance requiring city employees to be and to remain city residents upheld). See Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250, 255 (1974) . See also Martinez v. Bynum, 461 U.S. 321 (1983) (bona fide residency requirement for free tuition to public schools). and the cases do not inhibit the states when, having reasons for doing so, they bar travel by certain persons. 23 Footnote Jones v. Helms, 452 U.S. 412 (1981) (statute made it a misdemeanor to abandon a dependent child but a felony to commit the offense and then leave the state).

trending now in US News

Poll reveals whether Harris, Trump got post-debate bump after...

Kamala Harris' debate earrings trigger conspiracy theories among...

Springfield, Ohio, man reported Haitian migrants snatching geese...

Haitian migrants eating pets? Here's the even more serious story...

Trump dismisses music star's endorsement of Harris, says he likes...

Biden dons Trump hat in visit to Shanksville, Pa. fire station on...

Mega Millions player wins $800M jackpot

JD Vance tears into Taylor Swift after she backs Kamala Harris as...

Biden dons trump hat in visit to shanksville, pa. fire station on 9/11 anniversary.

President Biden briefly put on a red Trump hat Wednesday during a visit to a fire station in Shanksville, Pa., where he mingled with first responders after marking the 23rd anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

“I’m proud of you now, you old fart,” the Trump supporter who handed the president his red “Trump 2024” hat  told Biden , video obtained by conservative influencer Benny Johnson shows.  

Footage of Biden, 81, donning the hat was quickly shared by the Trump-Vance campaign and the White House later confirmed that the president had tried on the headwear in the spirit of bipartisanship.

Thanks for the support, Joe! pic.twitter.com/GeNDXWEHVi — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 11, 2024

“At the Shanksville Fire Station, @POTUS spoke about the country’s bipartisan unity after 9/11 and said we needed to get back to that,” White House senior deputy press secretary Andrew Bates wrote on X .

“As a gesture, he gave a hat to a Trump supporter who then said that in the same spirit, POTUS should put on his Trump cap. He briefly wore it.”

Supporters of the Republican nominee were less magnanimous.

“Kamala did so bad in last night’s debate, Joe Biden just put on a Trump hat,” the Trump War Room account  posted on X  along with footage that appeared to be reversed to show Biden putting on the hat rather than removing it.

Earlier, Biden had brought beer and pizza to the firehouse after participating in a wreath-laying ceremony at the memorial to United Airlines Flight 93, which was taken down by Al Qaeda hijackers with 40 people on board on that tragic day more than two decades ago.

Passengers on the Boeing 757 had stormed the cockpit before the terrorists could crash the jet into its intended target, believed to be either the White House or the US Capitol building.

Shanksville is located in Somerset County, a heavily Republican area where more than 77% of voters backed Trump in the 2020 election.

Ironically, during Tuesday night’s debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump mused about sending the Democratic nominee one of his trademark red ‘Make America Great Again’ hats while needling her for poaching his ideas.

“Everything that she believed three years ago and four years ago is out the window. She’s going to my philosophy now,” Trump said. 

“In fact, I was going to send her a ‘MAGA’ hat. She’s going to my philosophy.” 

Biden, who dropped out of the 2024 race July 21, had long accused Trump of posing a threat to the foundation of the country. 

“Too much of what’s happening in our country today is not normal,” the president said during remarks in September 2022. “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.”

The Post contacted the White House for additional comment. 

UK Edition Change

• UK Politics
• News Videos
• Paris 2024 Olympics
• Rugby Union
• Sport Videos
• John Rentoul
• Mary Dejevsky
• Andrew Grice
• Sean O’Grady
• Photography
• Theatre & Dance
• Culture Videos
• Fitness & Wellbeing
• Food & Drink
• Health & Families
• Royal Family
• Electric Vehicles
• Car Insurance Deals
• Lifestyle Videos
• Hotel Reviews
• News & Advice
• Simon Calder
• Australia & New Zealand
• South America
• C. America & Caribbean
• Middle East
• Politics Explained
• News Analysis
• Today’s Edition
• Home & Garden
• Broadband deals
• Fashion & Beauty
• Travel & Outdoors
• Sports & Fitness
• Climate 100
• Sustainable Living
• Climate Videos
• Solar Panels
• Behind The Headlines
• On The Ground
• Decomplicated
• You Ask The Questions
• Binge Watch
• Travel Smart
• Watch on your TV
• Crosswords & Puzzles
• Most Commented
• Newsletters
• Ask Me Anything
• Virtual Events
• Wine Offers
• Betting Sites

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in Please refresh your browser to be logged in

Pic of Biden wearing Trump hat sends MAGA fans into meltdown – but White House says he was promoting ‘unity’

The president briefly donned a ‘trump 2024’ hat during a visit to shanksville, pennsylvania, on wednesday following a 9/11 memorial service, article bookmarked.

Find your bookmarks in your Independent Premium section, under my profile

Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox

Get our free inside washington email, thanks for signing up to the inside washington email.

Trump supporters went into meltdown after pictures emerged online of Joe Biden wearing a piece of the former president’s campaign merchandise.

In the photos the president is seen wearing a bright red hat that bears the words “Trump 2024” and smiling. The X account of the Trump War Room was quick to share the image, writing “Thanks for the support, Joe!”

“Sleepy Joe, welcome aboard the Trump Train!!!!” wrote one user, with another adding: “Finally hopped on board!” Another branded Biden’s wearing of the hat as “the smartest thing he’s done in his entire political career.”

The Biden campaign was quick to clarify the circumstances of the picture, saying it had been a spontaneous gesture by the president to promote “bipartisan unity” during a trip to Pennsylvania on Wednesday.

White House Senior Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates said the incident had occurred during Biden’s visit to Shanksville Fire Station, following his appearance at a 9/11 memorial service.

“As a gesture, he gave a hat to a Trump supporter who then said that in the  same spirit, POTUS should put on his Trump cap. He briefly wore it,” Bates said.

Video of the swap, also shared online, appeared to confirm Bates’ account, but this did not stymy Trump supporters’ glee.

“See, Trump was right. Joe Biden does hate Kamala Harris,” wrote one user, alluding to comments made by Trump during Tuesday night’s presidential debate in Philadelphia. “I’ll give you a little secret,” he said.

“He hates her. He can’t stand her, but he got 14 million votes, they threw him out.”

Trump has peddled the line about discord between the president and vice president ever since Biden’s announcement that he was stepping down from the top of the ticket in July.

The former president has also joked about sending his new rival Harris a MAGA hat of her own, due to the fact that she has, he claims, stolen many of his policies.

“She’s going to my philosophy now. In fact, I was going to send her a maga hat,” he said on Tuesday.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article

Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.

New to The Independent?

Or if you would prefer:

Hi {{indy.fullName}}

• My Independent Premium
• Account details
• Help centre

• Travel Advisories |
• Contact Us |
• MyTravelGov |

Find U.S. Embassies & Consulates

Travel.state.gov, congressional liaison, special issuance agency, u.s. passports, international travel, intercountry adoption, international parental child abduction, records and authentications, popular links, travel advisories, mytravelgov, stay connected, legal resources, legal information, info for u.s. law enforcement, replace or certify documents.

Share this page:

The Bahamas Travel Advisory

Travel advisory january 26, 2024, the bahamas - level 2: exercise increased caution.

Updated with additional water safety information.

Exercise increased caution in The Bahamas due to  crime . 

Country Summary : The majority of crime occurs on New Providence (Nassau) and Grand Bahama (Freeport) islands. In Nassau, practice increased vigilance in the “Over the Hill” area (south of Shirley Street) where gang-on-gang violence has resulted in a high homicide rate primarily affecting the local population. Violent crime, such as burglaries, armed robberies, and sexual assaults, occur in both tourist and non-tourist areas. Be vigilant when staying at short-term vacation rental properties where private security companies do not have a presence.   

 Activities involving commercial recreational watercraft, including water tours, are not consistently regulated. Watercraft may be poorly maintained, and some operators may not have safety certifications.  Always review and heed local weather and marine alerts before engaging in water-based activities. Commercial watercraft operators have discretion to operate their vessels regardless of weather forecasts; injuries and fatalities have occurred. Due to these safety concerns, U.S. government personnel are not permitted to use independently operated jet-ski rentals on New Providence and Paradise Islands.   

Never swim alone, regardless of your age or level of swimming skills.  Keep within your fitness and swimming capabilities. Be mindful of sharks when swimming and engaging in water activities, as there have been recent fatal and non-fatal incidents involving sharks.  Be aware of weather and water conditions and heed local warnings. 

Read the country information page  for additional information on travel to The Bahamas. 

If you decide to travel to The Bahamas:  

• Do not answer your door at your hotel/residence unless you know who it is.  
• Do not physically resist any robbery attempt.  
• Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP)  to receive Alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency.  
• Follow the Department of State on Facebook , Twitter , and Instagram .  
• Review the Country Security Report  for The Bahamas.  
• Prepare a contingency plan for emergency and medical situations.  Review the Traveler’s Checklist .  
• Visit the CDC page for the latest Travel Health Information related to your travel.

Travel Advisory Levels

Assistance for u.s. citizens, bahamas map, search for travel advisories, external link.

You are about to leave travel.state.gov for an external website that is not maintained by the U.S. Department of State.

Links to external websites are provided as a convenience and should not be construed as an endorsement by the U.S. Department of State of the views or products contained therein. If you wish to remain on travel.state.gov, click the "cancel" message.

You are about to visit:

In debate, Trump embraced false claims from the deep corners of the far-right internet

Former President Donald Trump repeated a broad range of false claims, internet rumors and outlandish conspiracy theories during Tuesday night’s presidential debate, many of which might have seemed unintelligible without a deep understanding of obscure corners of far-right social media. 

It included a variety of baseless claims about abortion, campaign rallies, the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and bribes to government officials — not to mention a sensational rumor about immigrants in Ohio stealing and eating pets. And he denied any shift in his perspective on the 2020 election , falsely claiming there was “so much proof” that he won it. 

While some of the claims may have been familiar dog whistles to people who spend time on fringe message boards, it’s not clear how the outlandish rumors may have landed with everyone else. The debate drew more than 57.5 million viewers , according to ABC, which hosted it. 

Late in the debate right before the second break, Trump released a torrent of vague claims alleging corruption in the Biden administration.

“You know, Biden doesn’t go after people because, supposedly, China paid millions of dollars,” he said. “He’s afraid to do it — between him and his son, they get all this money from Ukraine. They get all this money from all of these different countries. And then you wonder why is he so loyal to this one, that one, Ukraine, China? Why did he get $3.5 million from the mayor of Moscow’s wife? Why did she pay him $3.5 million? This is a crooked administration, and they’re selling our country down the tubes.”

None of that appears to be based in fact. There is a debunked claim that Hunter Biden received $3.5 million from the wife of the former mayor of Moscow, which was included in a GOP report four years ago but attributed only to a “confidential document.” 

Trump’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday about the volume of conspiracy talk during the debate. 

Trump’s embrace of internet rumors disappointed some allies who had hoped he would keep the focus on kitchen table concerns such as inflation in the debate with Vice President Kamala Harris. 

Conservative talk radio host Erick Erickson vented his frustration during the debate, posting on X that Trump’s “stupid” advisers “got Trump to repeat your lie about the pets.” 

And after the debate, some of Trump’s allies kept up the pace with a fresh conspiracy theory about Harris, asserting without evidence that the earrings she wore must have had mini-speakers in them. 

Harris, by contrast, seemed to try to use the debate to appeal to people outside her base, mentioning that she’s a gun owner and boasting about how the Biden administration has increased domestic oil production . 

The debate offered a sense of how much Trump has been consumed by internet personalities outside the mainstream in his bid to reclaim the White House. Among the people on his plane Tuesday was Laura Loomer, a far-right social media influencer and self-described “proud Islamophobe” who has made sharing pro-Trump fringe conspiracy theories her full-time job. 

In recent weeks, Trump has done a series of interviews with right-wing influencers such as Logan Paul and Adin Ross, whose audiences skew young and male. 

And Trump’s personal internet brand is now centered on his own social media platform, Truth Social, where his vows to lock up political enemies get a warmer reception than they would on more popular apps, such as Instagram or YouTube. 

Tuesday’s debate represented a collision of those two media ecosystems: the relatively small and insular far-right online world and the more traditional nationwide audience. 

“In recent years, Democrats have usually been the party that’s too online and stuck in a left-wing bubble,” Josh Kraushaar, a political analyst for Fox News Radio and editor-in-chief of the political website Jewish Insider, wrote on X . 

“At this debate, it was Trump who relayed a (false) online social media meme about migrants eating cats that showed his team in its own bubble,” he wrote. 

It wasn’t the first time Trump has made a tactical error by revealing his ties to the insular world of the online far right. In a 2020 debate with Joe Biden, Trump declined to condemn white supremacist groups and told one extremist group to “ stand back and stand by .” And in 2022, he promoted several posts on Truth Social about the fringe QAnon conspiracy theory . 

During Tuesday’s debate, one of Trump’s bizarre claims related to abortion. In response to a question from ABC News moderator Linsey Davis, who asked him about his changing views on the subject, he accused Democrats of supporting “execution after birth” — which isn’t legal in any state, as Davis noted in a fact-check during the debate. 

Trump said, in particular, that a former governor of West Virginia whom he didn’t name was in favor of executing newborns. But he was most likely confusing that state with neighboring Virginia and its Democratic former governor, Ralph Northam. In 2019, Northam spoke about nonviable pregnancies in an interview that abortion opponents later distorted, according to fact-checks from The Associated Press and Reuters . 

Trump mentioned some internet rumors only in brief asides, as when Harris brought up the subject of his campaign rallies, saying people had started “leaving his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom.” (Several news outlets, including The Wall Street Journal and The New Republic , have reported early departures from Trump rallies.) 

Trump fired back without evidence that, at her rallies, Harris is “paying them to be there” — an allegation that the nonpartisan PolitiFact ruled to be false after it spread in right-wing media circles last month. 

Other times, Trump raised conspiracy theories that were most likely too vague to be fact-checked. Midway through the debate, Trump spoke about election security and alleged that an unspecified “they” are trying to get illegal immigrants to vote. 

“They can’t even speak English. They don’t even know what country they’re in, practically. And these people are trying to get them to vote, and that’s why they’re allowing them to come into our country,” he said in one answer, without giving specifics about who was allegedly involved in the plot. 

Trump has in the past alleged that “millions and millions” of votes are cast illegally, some of them by noncitizen immigrants; researchers and news organizations have regularly debunked the claims. 

David Ingram is a tech reporter for NBC News.