cannot inhibit people from leaving it by imposing a tax on doing so. United States v. Wheeler, The Constitution grants to the states the power to prosecute individuals for wrongful interference with the right to travel. Edwards v. California, A state cannot prohibit indigent people from moving into it. Kent v. Dulles, The right to travel is a part of the "liberty" of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. Aptheker v. Secretary of State, Section 6 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, which makes it a crime for any member of a communist organization to attempt to use or obtain a passport, is an unconstitutional abridgment of the right to travel. United States v. Guest, There is a constitutional right to travel from state to state, and the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment extend to citizens who suffer deprivations of their rights at the hands of a private conspiracy where there is state participation in the conspiracy, no matter how minimal. Shapiro v. Thompson, The fundamental right to travel and the Equal Protection Clause forbid a state from reserving welfare benefits only for persons that have resided in the state for at least one year. Saenz v. Roe, A California law that limits new residents' benefits for the first year they live in the state is an unconstitutional violation of their right to travel. Restrictions on involuntary commitment Jackson v. Indiana, A state violates due process by involuntarily committing a criminal defendant for an indefinite period of time solely on the basis of his or her permanent incompetency to stand trial on the charges filed against him or her. O'Connor v. Donaldson, A state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by themselves or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends. Addington v. Texas, Clear and convincing evidence is required by the Fourteenth Amendment in a civil proceeding brought under state law to commit an individual involuntarily for an indefinite period to a state mental hospital. Youngberg v. Romeo, Involuntarily committed residents have protected liberty interests under the Due Process Clause to reasonably safe conditions of confinement, freedom from unreasonable bodily restraints, and such minimally adequate training as reasonably may be required by these interests. Public health and safety Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana Board