Shifting governmental responsibilities to private citizens can never be justified

Robert Healey
Posted 2/24/15

Cause there’s really no place to go, let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. 

The recent spate of snowstorms has presented an age old problem of what to do with the snow?  In the modern …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Shifting governmental responsibilities to private citizens can never be justified

Posted

Cause there’s really no place to go, let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. 

The recent spate of snowstorms has presented an age old problem of what to do with the snow?  In the modern hustle-bustle society, the snow cannot sit fallow blanketing the fields until tilling in the spring.  We, as a society, have things to do and places to be. 

While the pace of modern society is lamentable, it seems a reality.

Against this backdrop, we have a great battle over clearing sidewalks of snow.

A non-exhaustive search of its origin, a Constitutional amendment, the duties of government, and the regulation of commerce, all combine to illuminate this issue.

It is understood that there is a health and safety factor involved.  People do run a much higher risk of injury by having to walk in the roadway, especially after dark. As such, it is a valid concern for local governance in terms of safety. 

To pass ordinances related to mandatory owner clearing of public property, however, challenges the very freedoms we possess as Americans.

Historically, such clearing of sidewalks would be a governmental responsibility.  In the late 19th century, this ‘duty’ was shifted somewhat.  Various ordinances were passed to compel business owners to clear their walkways.  This logic is now metastasizing and it is the position of various local governments that all property owners must clear their sidewalks.  This is a misapplication of the legal concept.

A property owner really has no such duty and cannot be conscripted into service.  The 13th Amendment ended slavery and involuntary servitude.  With the exception of military service, unpaid labor cannot possibly be compelled under the Constitution regardless of the public good; although there are powerful arguments that taxing authority is a related form of slavery, taxing may be legitimized in that taxes benefit the whole society rationale, as laughable as that is.

So, you would naturally ask yourself, why do such laws exist without constitutional challenge?  The answer lies in an obscure reasoning applied to differentiate license and privilege from rights and individual freedoms.

In authorizing a commercial operation, the logic goes, the state has granted a license, subject to the provisions it may set forth to regulate the licensed party.  This distinction is lost on most, including many judges.

While it may be socially egregious, albeit legal, to hold commercial operations to whimsical standards, it is clearly constitutionally impermissible to extend that logic against the rights of a private citizen.

This all goes to whether the government can compel private citizens to shovel snow on property that the citizen does not own.

The conclusion that can be drawn is a simple one.  While it may be a socially responsible act to clear sidewalks in front of your property, unless it is a business (and I presume the argument to extend to rental units they are a business), clearing sidewalks cannot be placed on citizens in the form of involuntary servitude.

If the government wants its property cleared, it should do it and tax the people for it getting done.  That is how the system was designed to work. 

Shifting governmental responsibilities to private citizens can never be justified.  It is a shame that the people we elect forget that the people have ‘inalienable rights’.  It is a sin that most have no idea what the concept entails.

An attorney, Mr. Healey ran as the Moderate candidate for governor in 2014.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here