B.3(b). Passport and Return

The Government cannot deny a Citizen a passport or the Right to return to the United States, except under a lawful extradition process.

Another key element of universal human rights is the idea that every person has the right to a passport from their native country. They also enjoy the right to return to country. Again, this is directly tied to the UDHR, which explicitly states, “Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”[1] If a passport is required for entry into the United States (it is), then logically, the government can’t deny its Citizens a passport.

The right to movement is fundamental to our national identity. This attitude, which most Americans still hold, has its roots in European settlers’ immigration to the United States. At the time, travellers needed permission from the crown or their local lord to travel abroad. Some settlers fled their countries of origin illegally. The resentment from that experience has lingered longer than its memory, but it is wired into our American DNA.

I can go wherever the hell I want, and the government doesn't get a say. They don't have to bail me out if I go somewhere dangerous, but they don't get to tell me I can't go. Look no farther than the Americans who traveled to Britain to serve as pilots there during the Battle of Britain, or to the Americans serving in the Ukrainian army today.

But the Right to travel and return is more than a cultural touchstone. It’s also vital to a free Republic. Exile is simply illegitimate in a free society. The purpose of exile is to punish or to remove people from civil discourse who are political rivals or otherwise inconvenient to the established powers-that-be. Punishment can be handled through the judicial system without resorting to exile. As far as removal of the “unwelcome,” there is nothing more inherently undemocratic than silencing your rivals by removing them. Why not simply assassinate them and be done with it? Execute them summarily in the public square? You, my reader, probably (rightly) recoiled slightly just reading the mere suggestion. While the person in question retains their life if they’re exiled, they’ve still lost their democratic voice.

So, what does that have to do with passports? It’s simple. If the government can deny or revoke passports, what stops it from revoking the passport of a “dissident” while they are abroad? That’s a factual imposition of exile.

Finally, the United States, like most nations, finds it helpful to have extradition treaties with various international partners. This is obviously a case where return is denied, so how does that work? Under the language of the Charter, lawful extradition is allowed.

All extraditions must meet the following requirements:

· A valid treaty in force at the time of the alleged offense;

· A formal written request from the foreign Government;

· Probable cause evidence acceptable under United States law;

· Judicial review of the evidence, treaty language, and written request; and

· Final approval and certification by the Secretary of State.

Since lawful extradition is allowed, how does it work? A Citizen may be extradited, but only under very specific conditions. If a nation with a valid extradition treaty submits a formal, written request, the courts and the Secretary of State review the request. Is there a valid treaty in place? If not, no extradition. Does the treaty language include the charges spelled out in the petition? If not, no extradition. Does the petition present evidence acceptable under our laws as sufficient to find probable cause? If not, no extradition. If, and only if, the request meets all of the conditions listed here, the request must be approved.

No doubt, at the time of a treaty’s ratification, the President and the Senate were convinced that the legal system of the partner nation was equal to our expectations of fairness. But what about treaty partners whose systems have changed enough since ratification that they no longer meet those conditions? What if, after revolution, coup, or simply the normal change in laws over time, that nation’s legal system no longer meets our standards? History shows that this does happen. It’s precisely for this reason that there has to be a vigorous review of the elements to be met before denying our Citizens their rights and shipping them to another country, outside of our jurisdiction.

Our citizens are still our citizens, even when another nation petitions for their extradition. They are still entitled to the protections our law affords. If they can’t receive them in the courts of the receiving country, the Secretary of State, under this Charter, denies the request.

No Citizen can be deported for any reason, except as constitutionally allowed for extradition. A Citizen has the Right to leave or return to the United States.

This paragraph is an absolute blanket ban on all deportations of American citizens. It codifies the constitutional illegitimacy of exile. It finishes with a sentence reaffirming the right mentioned at the beginning of this subsection, and it does so in language that closely mirrors the UDHR.

[1] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, U.N. Doc. A/RES/217 (III) (Dec. 10, 1948), Art. 13.