Licensing is unconstitutional. First, since many people have a misconception about licensing:
- Certifying is when some entity makes a guarantee (certifies) about the qualifications of something/someone. Other people can then choose whether to hire certified or uncertified people.
- Licensing is when a government outlaws an activity and decides who gets to partake in it by issuing licenses. Other people can not choose whether to hire licensed or unlicensed people.
If a government did not license doctors, that does not mean there would be no certification bodies, or that the government would not have entities to certify doctors. It only means that customers would have the choice of whether to hire a certified doctor or an uncertified doctor, and customers would have the choice of which certification they want to see from their doctor.
Why licensing is unconstitutional:
- US Constitution :
To define and punish ... Offenses against the Law of Nations
- Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
- Bill of Rights, Amendment 9 :
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
- Wikipedia on what the word
happinessmeant in 1776 :
the common meaning may have been "prosperity, thriving, wellbeing"
In 1689, Locke argued in his Two Treatises of Government that political society existed for the sake of protecting "property", which he defined as a person's "life, liberty, and estate".
So, it reasons:
- Since a sovereign’s duty in the “Law of Nations” is to protect the rights of its citizenry
- Since failing to do so is an offense against the Law of Nations
- Since punishing offenses against the Law of Nations is a duty presented in the US Constitution
- Since the same people were involved in both the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and thereby recognize the same rights of the citizenry
- Since the Declaration of Independence includes a recognition of the inalienable rights of
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,
- Then we can assume the US Constitution places a duty on government to protect the inalienable rights of
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
happinessmeant “prosperity, thriving, wellbeing”
- Since “prosperity, thriving, wellbeing” requires work
- Then outlawing of work is unconstitutional
Why is this important?
first British Accredited Registry (BAR) was established in Boston during 1761 to attempt to allow only accredited barrister-lawyers access to the British courts of New England. This was the first attempt to control who could represent defendants in the court at or within the bar in America. – http://educate-yourself.org/cn/attorneysarenotlawyers13mar05.shtml
The British Crown has denied an understanding of law to the common man by making the practice of such illegal by requiring membership to BARs. Consequently, the common man knows little about the law and attorneys are limited in their actions from fear of reprimand.
A similar situation occurs in medicine, where licensing has led to restricted inefficient methodologies of cartel profiteering with statistically terrible health outcomes. The situation has become so bad, many people have started seeking alternatives.
So, it is important because licensing is a form of cartel formation, one of the primary dangers against which government is supposed to protect its citizenry.