I'm a little confused here. Let's say a government puts in place a policy whereby it offers $10,000 to returning emigres as start-up capital for a new enterprise. This is clearly an incentive to change location, but I can't see how it curtails anyone's rights. The government instituting the policy might think that luring emigres home is a good move to maximize the social welfare of its populace. Anything wrong with that? Or consider a government that's trying to keep its skilled people from emigrating - perhaps it would take steps to make its economy more meritocratic. This doesn't imply impinging on rights at all, as far as I can tell - in fact, it would be a positive move for all the citizens of the country. And yet it would influence someone's decision on where to move. I think there's a difference between telling someone where they should live and influencing their location decision; there's a lot of room for welfare-improving policies that do the latter.