Comment: sorry for the tiny technical error

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: "right to life, liberty, and (see in situ)

sorry for the tiny technical error

Unfortunately you are do not have the proper definition or legal scope for "due process of law".

Due Process of Law: Law in its regular course of administration through courts of justice. Black's Law Dictionary 1st Edition

Due process of law ONLY applies to the judicial branch of government, so your assumption that it applies to law making is not correct. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution comes almost directly from Magna Carta 25:

"No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice."

Due Process of law means that an action is brought against you, a judge adjudicates, and a jury decides your fate.

I can't even follow you as to how the State, as a group of freepeople, cannot construct highways according to the argument I laid out, so addressing that issue is problematic for me except to say that the Constitution does not provide the authority to the Federal Government to block freepeople from constructing roads privately or corporately through State.

The one thing I would ask is why you are getting so angry that the Supreme Court of the United States decided long ago that no government cannot take away a freeperson's right to travel as defined within the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

I AM is all that is. Everything else is malleable.