> Surely, you agree that peoples’ right to vote cannot to be vindicated if they can’t freely access polling locations. There is no right to vote. So the rest o

> Surely, you agree that peoples’ right to vote cannot to be vindicated if they can’t freely access polling locations. There is no right to vote. So the rest of your case does not apply. Furthermore, I don't agree at all with your analogy. I feel that it is fundamental requirement to have complete access to the law. So any examples, that result in arguing to the contrary I disagree with up to and including the "taking of property". > But that doesn’t mean that you are obligated to let everyone onto your property! This is also not true. The legal concept of "Easement by Necessity" ( https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/easement-by-necessity.html https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/easement-by-n... ) applies so once again your example is incorrect.