I'm aware, my view is the court's current views are incomplete. Courts can be wrong.
What draws the most interest is the right to enter states freely. Combine that with the need to travel and participate in commerce and you quickly arrive at the conclusion the right to travel in general must also be protected, and indeed we can see the hardships brought upon people when they are unable to drive, etc.
Good luck arguing your opinion though - go watch a few videos of "sovereign citizens" trying to argue they don't need a driver's license to "travel" when pulled over driving.
What draws the most interest is the right to enter states freely. Combine that with the need to travel and participate in commerce and you quickly arrive at the conclusion the right to travel in general must also be protected, and indeed we can see the hardships brought upon people when they are unable to drive, etc.