Legal Question in Constitutional Law in California

You have a right to travel within the U.S. via legal means. That means you can travel via a legal motor vehicle. But it does not mean you can *operate* that vehicle. Some people think that the right to travel makes it illegal for states to require drivers licenses, but that's not how it works. You can be a passenger in someone else's vehicle whether you're licensed or not, but you have no more right to drive a car without a license than you do to fly a plane without one.

There's no right to travel explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, and like most so-called "rights" your ability to travel freely has been whittled away into nothingness by the courts. You can go wherever you like as a passenger in someone else's vehicle, but if you want to drive your own vehicle, you'll need to be licensed, insured, and free from driver's license suspensions that can be imposed for a variety of reasons ranging from DUI convictions to failure to pay child support.

The DMV and the California courts maintain that "driving is a privilege, not a right." If you have a few extra millions lying around, and you're interested in sponsoring a Right-To-Drive ballot measure, give me a call.