18 ms·
So this is the only part of that wiki article that suggests you're right: >The U.S. Supreme Court in Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868) declared that freedo
by remarkEon 7y ago
So this is the only part of that wiki article that suggests you're right:
>The U.S. Supreme Court in Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. 35 (1868) declared that freedom of movement is a fundamental right and therefore a state cannot inhibit people from leaving the state by taxing them.
I'm having a hard time finding a controlling case that says states can't do the inverse, i.e. levy fees on those who want to move to their state. I don't have the time tonight to read the whole case and its references, but I'm happy to be proven wrong here. Levying a fee on people who move in seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do. After all, we all have to pay move-in fees when we lease a new apartment or buy a house.
- learc83 7y agoThe supreme court struck down the refusal to disperse welfare payments to new residents as unconstitutionally restricting freedom to travel. I gurantee you that taxing new residents would be struck down for the exact same reason. >After all, we all have to pay move-in fees when we lease a new apartment or buy a house. That has no bearing on this at all. Private companies are free to do many things the government can't.