Also known as: rights to travel · right-of-travel · freedom of movement · interstate travel right
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A fundamental constitutional right protecting the freedom of individuals to move freely between states. The right bars states from imposing durational residency requirements that deter migration of indigent persons or penalize new residents by withholding benefits available to longer-term residents. A state's interest in protecting its treasury does not justify such burdens.
Riley Rivera moved from another state to State A and applied for cash assistance after securing part-time work. State A denied the application because she had lived there only four months, short of the one-year requirement. The denial burdens her right to travel by deterring indigent migration to obtain benefits.
Roland Rhodes relocated to State B and sought full welfare payments. State B limited him to the lower benefit level from his prior state for the first year. The cap treats new residents differently and violates equal protection principles tied to the right to travel.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Roger Ramirez and five unrelated adults rented a home in the Village of Belle Terre. The village ordinance restricted occupancy to related persons or two unrelated adults and was challenged as burdening the right to travel. The ordinance survived because it addressed local concerns like noise without directly penalizing interstate movement.
Ronald Reed sought a development permit from the water management district. The district demanded off-site mitigation payments unrelated to the project's impact. Reed argued the demand coerced surrender of rights including travel by conditioning approval on unrelated concessions.
Regina Robinson moved to Iowa and filed for divorce after six months. Iowa required one year of residency before maintaining the action. The requirement was upheld because it regulated access to a specific judicial proceeding rather than broadly deterring migration for vital benefits.
Roberto Reyes rode as a passenger when an officer stopped the car. The officer ordered all occupants to remain seated during the investigation. The stop restrained Reyes's movement but did not implicate the right to travel between states.
State laws that penalize the right to travel by imposing durational residency requirements for welfare benefits trigger strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause. Such laws fail because protecting the treasury by discouraging indigent migration is not a permissible objective.
Supporting sources
Yes. The right includes the right of new residents to equal treatment with longer-term residents. A state law capping benefits for newcomers at their former state's level violates the Fourteenth Amendment under both equal protection and Privileges or Immunities principles.
Supporting sources
A one-year residency requirement for filing divorce actions may survive when it regulates access to a specific judicial proceeding rather than denying vital benefits. The requirement does not deter migration in the same way as welfare barriers.
Supporting sources
Zoning rules that limit household composition may be challenged as burdening the right to travel, but they are often upheld when they address legitimate local concerns such as noise and traffic without directly penalizing interstate movement.
Supporting sources
…or any person.” 278 U. S., at 122. The present ordinance is challenged on several grounds: that it interferes with a person’s right to travel; that it interferes with the right to migrate to and settle within a State; that it bars people who are uncongenial to the present residents; that it expresses the social preferences of the…