Well, well, well, it looks like the Sovereign Citizen ‘Moor’ movement has suffered yet another blow to their ever-dwindling credibility. This time, it’s their ‘right to travel’ in a vessel that has failed in court – again. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
For those not in the know, the ‘right to travel’ is one of the cornerstone arguments used by Sovereign Citizens to justify all sorts of wacky behavior. Essentially, they claim that being subjected to any sort of government regulation while traveling (i.e. driver’s licenses, insurance, etc.) is a violation of their ‘God-given’ rights. And, of course, they have the legal precedent to back it up – at least in their minds.
Except, as it turns out, the courts don’t really see it that way. In fact, time and time again, they have consistently ruled against these bizarre ‘right to travel’ claims. And yet, Sovereign Citizens continue to push this nonsense, as if they’re going to eventually win a case – any case – before a judge who isn’t in on the ‘big government’ conspiracy.
The latest example comes to us from North Dakota, where a Sovereign Citizen ‘Moor’ attempted to defend himself against charges of operating a boat without proper registration. In his defense (if you can call it that), he argued that he was merely exercising his ‘right to travel’ in a vessel, which apparently includes not having to put a license plate on your boat. Shockingly, the judge wasn’t impressed by this argument, and found the defendant guilty.
It’s almost as if this whole Sovereign Citizen thing is a giant house of cards, built on a foundation of lies, legal misunderstandings, and a healthy dose of paranoia. But, hey, who am I to judge? I’m sure the next court case will be the one that finally proves them all right.