Skip to main content

What attorney do I need for helping me to hold DMV accountable for violating my rights to liberty, and freedom of movement?

Portland, OR |

What would warrant me by the State of Oregon and/or any Department/Agency/Organization/Representative thereof/in to be insinuatively deemed as NOT: living, dwelling, having domicile in/of, and/or being a resident-and-citizen of the State of Oregon and its territory: that my right to liberty of movement be unconstitutionally and discriminatively infringed upon (Driver's License Suspended) without any Trial and or Hearing held by any Common Law jurisdiction and or court: that my status as said resident and citizen be implied to be ‘Non-Lawfully within the territory of the State of Oregon’. If I am however lawfully within the territory of the State of Oregon, then how am I any type of threat to national security, public order, public health, morals, and/or the rights and freedoms of others?

Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads: (1) “Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.” And then in: Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights incorporates this right into treaty law: (1) “Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.” And goes onto say within same source that: (3) “The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre publique), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.” What type of attorney specializes in this?

+ Read More

Attorney answers 3

Posted

It sounds like you need a Civil Rights attorney -- visit the Oregon State Bar's website, or give the Bar a call. It may help if you describe the facts of what happened when you talk to an attorney, rather than your legal conclusions -- otherwise, it's as if you visit a doctor and tell him your own diagnosis before the doctor has even heard your symptoms. Of course though, you should do that in the privacy and confidentiality of the professional's office -- not on the internet. Good luck!

Asker

Posted

Dear Mr. Oberdorfer, thank you for answering this question in such a way that I was able to understand, and also without belittling me: I am extremely dyslexic and do not think like most people think and have often been told I have no common sense: whatever that means. As if the belief of the majority has done our great Nation -"We the People"- any good: as history based on what I have gathered reflects more so a -"We the Sheeple"- type of status. And to think that whether we are chained to either the ways greater persons before us have thunk, or to the struggling disciplines of finding out how to think for ourselves without societal rejection, and/or excommunication from the status quo of traditionalists, we are indeed still chained to something: so it would seem. The State Bar Association can only make referrals to attorneys that charge a 35 dollar consultation fee (which I in no way I can afford); And thus far after contacting 402 attorneys to date, I have not yet found one single attorney willing to give me audience long enough to thoroughly hear what I am going through and/or have undergone. I suppose they are just not hungry enough. As if it has become a monopolized infrastructure of a "me first" approach...rather than 'helping our fellow-neighbor/citizen' mentality. As a Concert Pianist I have 88 (amount of keys thereon) reasons to touch the Piano. Yet the more the strings break the less the desire within me to play songs that surpass what can be played within the scope of the new range of movement thereon. Well it is the same case with those whom we our ancestors hath somehow allowed to now rule over us. We are all now held to the performance level that the new-range of movement is allotted for us to function within. Yet here go I daring to suggest a better -yet lighter- ball and chain.

Posted

It really depends on the reason that the DMV did this. If there's truly no reason, then yes, you may want a civil rights attorney. But I strongly suspect that the state has at least some reason it would propose to explain its actions. For example, one common reason for a driver's license to be suspended is nonpayment of child support. If this is what happened in your case, then you need an attorney who specializes in domestic relations.

One other thing: You need to adjust your expectations. Revocation of a driver's license may be a civil rights issue if it is done for discriminatory reasons, but is not for the reasons you think. Loss of a driver's license has nothing to do with your "freedom of movement." You are allowed to move about without a driver's license. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

Please read the following notice: <br> <br> Jay Bodzin is licensed to practice law in the State of Oregon and the Federal District of Oregon, and cannot give advice about the laws of other jurisdictions. All comments on this site are intended for informational purposes only, and do not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. No posts or comments on this site are in any way confidential. Each case is unique. You are advised to have counsel at all stages of any legal proceeding, and to speak with your own lawyer in private to get advice about your specific situation. <br> <br> Jay Bodzin, Northwest Law Office, 2075 SW First Avenue, Suite 2J, Portland, OR 97201 | Telephone: 503-227-0965 | Facsimile: 503-345-0926 | Email: jay@northwestlawoffice.com | Online: www.northwestlawoffice.com

Asker

Posted

Mr. Jay Bodzin: doctor prescribes seizure medication. No tests ever done to warrant such a medication being prescribed. never follow up with that doctor. One year later i see different doctor.. different doctor sees in medical record prescription for seizure meds. asks hows meds are going. I explain I dont have a seizure disorder and or problem. Different doctor refuses to treat me for not taking meds. furthermore I file complaint against different doctor for refusing to treat me for not taking meds for something i dont have. Manager of clinic where different doctor works contacts DMV claims me to be threat to others and self by not taking seizure meds. lost all employment, bank accounts, and lifestyle due to driver's license suspended over false accusations. no doctors willing to fill out DMV appeal form. Allegedly DMV is to make their decisions on medical fact, and not hearsay from a Doctor who #1) is not an M.D. and #2)was not even the original doctor that wrote the prescription The act against me to DMV was retaliatory because I filed a formal complaint against second doctor's refusal to continue treating me based upon my refusal to take seizure medications for a condition I never had. After driver's license suspension, per DMV reps advice.. I go back to original doctor and ask for her mistake/situation be fixed. Now she suddenly wants to do tests to see if I have seizure disorder. I take every possible test that could be done (over 8 month time period) Each test result came back proving I was 100% healthy [no abnormalities whatsoever] Original doctor still refuses to admit to making mistake by writing prescription for seizure disorder roughly 1 yr and 8 months previous; and she further states that I am making her uncomfortable by asking her to pin her word , reputation, and license against the word of the other (second) doctor. Both doctors refuse to fill out form DMV requires for appeals process to begin for getting license back.

Jay Bodzin

Jay Bodzin

Posted

You don't need to convince me of anything. And you probably shouldn't post this much detail on the internet. You can't count on this forum being anonymous or confidential.

Asker

Posted

Furthermore Mr. Bodzin: in regards to you saying, "Driving is a privelege, not a right." by what source or law do you obtain this? I ask this because of the following: "Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience". - Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago, 169 NE 22 and: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled: The "RIGHT" to travel is a part of the liberty of which the Citizen "cannot be deprived" without due process of the law under the 5th Amendment. See: Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125 and: The "United States Supreme Court" has ruled that: Undoubtedly the "RIGHT" of locomotion, the "RIGHT" to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the "RIGHT," ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a "RIGHT" secured by the Fourteenth Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution. See: Williams v. Fears, 343 U.S. 270, 274 So it would seem that...Thus, there can be little doubt that, when we as Citizens travels upon the roadways, we do so, as a matter of "RIGHT" and not a privilege granted by the State. I could go on...yet was just making a point as per my understanding. If I am incorrect in a conclusion please make this clear and what reasons they are. And once again, Mr. Bodzin, thank you for taking time to speak with me. P.S. What was once thought and claimed to be high-minded rhetoric has become The U.S. Constitution. So perhaps that which might be considered a high-minded rhetoric of today, may very well have a great influence on the Nations of tomorrow.

Asker

Posted

Mr. Bodzin, all that I love and adore: aside from a few dreams, desires, possessions and talents I have left, have been ripped from me due to the injustices i have been forced to endure. I would rather die standing for something that is righteous, upstanding, and noble to the common interests of all people of our great land of the free and home of the brave, than live knowing I accepted slander, defamation of character, unjust ridicule, character assassination, reputational ruin, and/or defending the rights of my Self: whilst encouraging others to do the same through effective educational methods. If I cannot live for the genuine betterment of you, myself, and others what good is living? Lest you or someone eventually say, "Do not live for me, I stand alone." In regards to whether or not information I post on the internet via this method through AVVO is or is not confidential I worry not of this, for I speak truth as I know it,...as well as ask questions for helping me to gain understanding and wisdom from informational sharing.

Posted

If you've got a pending DUI case that may impact your license, I suggest retaining a locally experienced DUI attorney. There are tangible issues that need to be addressed in a timely manner. My advice is to deal with those first before taking a constitutional rights approach. Good luck.

Jasen Nielsen

Get Avvo’s 3-part DUI email series

A roundup of the best tips and legal advice.

DUI topics

Recommended articles about DUI

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer