Oh please, that type of 'argument' makes the conversation laughable LOL. I've heard a lot of things claimed to be someone's constitutional right, but the right to fly on a private airline has never been one of them. That aside, do you know for a fact that no one has ever brought that to court? I don't know either way. If so, I doubt they got far. I'd have to see the ACLU take it up and bring it to court, and win to believe anyone would take that serious.
What would be your argument that there is a Constitutional right to commercial airline passage? Or, for that matter, commercial travel of any sort? Or even private vehicle transport?
Wow, it seems that some people are woefully ignorant of the freedoms set forth in the Constitution and upheld through Supreme Court precedence over the centuries.
The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution states that "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." I'll give you that that's pretty vague, and it didn't take long for our forefathers to hash out what that meant in the court system.
1823, Corfield v. Coryell (6 Fed. Cas. 546, no. 3,230 C.C.E.D.Pa. 1823):
The issue was actually interstate commerce, i.e. whether New Jersey could enact a law forbidding non-residents from gathering clams and oysters. BUT, the ruling clearly upheld the notion that freedom of movement within the country is a Constitutional right. Justice Bushrod Washington delineated the rights granted by the Privileges and Immunities Clause including "The right of a citizen of one state to pass through, or to reside in any other state, for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional pursuits, or otherwise."
1869, Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. (8 Wall) 168:
This was a Supreme Court case in which the actual issue was whether a corporation counted as a citizen for purposes of the Privileges and Immunities Clause. However, in the written opinion, Justice Field ruminated on the intent of that clause stating, in part, "it gives them [citizens] the right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."
But perhaps the most landmark ruling was the following:
1920, United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281:
This Supreme Court case determined that the federal government does not have the right to prosecute kidnappers, because only the states have the right to punish someone's imposition on someone else's freedom of movement.
However, in drafting the majority opinion, Chief Justice Edward Douglas White made a clear statement affirming the right of Americans to travel unimpeded. "In all the States from the beginning down to the adoption of the Articles of Confederation the citizens thereof possessed the fundamental right, inherent in citizens of all free governments, peacefully to dwell within the limits of their respective States, to move at will from place to place therein, and to have free ingress thereto and egress therefrom, with a consequent authority in the States to forbid and punish violations of this fundamental right."
Now, there have been challenges regarding international travel, but as far as domestic travel is concerned (which is, of course, the topic of this debate), there have been exactly ZERO Supreme Court (or federal district court cases) that have stricken or limited the Constitutional right to freedom of travel.
So the fact remains that unless and until the Supreme Court deems it otherwise, we do IN FACT have a Constitutional right to travel by any means up to and including commercial air travel. Next argument?
