# Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?



## LilOlLady (Jul 3, 2011)

*Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
*Courts Have Ruled They Do*
By Robert Longley,

While illegal aliens do not enjoy all of the rights granted to citizens by the Constitution, specifically the rights to vote or possess firearms, these rights can also be denied to U.S. citizens convicted of felonies. In final analysis, the courts have ruled that, while they are within the borders of the United States, *illegal aliens are granted the same fundamental, undeniable constitutional rights granted to all Americans*.

Illegal Aliens and Constitutional Rights &#8211; Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?


*That is the problem*.


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 3, 2011)

*Immigrants' Rights*
*No Human Being Is Illegal*


The Constitution guarantees the* fundamental rights and civil liberties *of every person in this country. Upholding the rights of the* politically disenfranchised *is vital; when the government has the power to *deny legal rights and due process to one group of people, it puts all our rights in danger.* More 
Immigrants' Rights | American Civil Liberties Union

*Now I fully understand why we have 20 million illegal aliens in this country.
When the constitution was written there were no illegal aliens in this country or any immigration laws.*


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 3, 2011)

with liberty and justice for all.


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 3, 2011)

*What is an immigrant?*
An Immigrant is a person who has citizenship in one country but who enters a different country to set up a permanent residence. *Just entering another country does not make you an immigrant*. In order to be an immigrant you must have citizenship in one country, and you must have gone to a different country with the specific intention of living there.
More;
What is an immigrant? - Immigration Assist &#8211; Working Around the World


----------



## SW2SILVER (Jul 4, 2011)

I think my left testicle has more "Constitutional rights " that I DO. I think, perhaps it's time to abolish the Constitution and find  something better that rings  "true"  and follows common sense. About TIME!


----------



## Wolfmoon (Jul 4, 2011)

Where does it say in the Constitution that the citizens of La Republic of Mexico shall enjoy the rights of American citizens? 

Where does it say that border jumpers will be given the same benefits of the American citizens and that the American citizens shall enjoy paying for those said benefits? 

Stand up America and get a back bone and demand our politicians deport illegal aliens and close the ports and borders.  Or we will vote them out of office!


----------



## Toronado3800 (Jul 4, 2011)

LilOlLady said:


> *Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
> *Courts Have Ruled They Do*
> By Robert Longley,
> 
> ...



We are talking the average Mexican national who is here working on my neighbir's lawn not a sworn militant enemy of America caught planting a bomb on a bridge I assume.

What rights would you like to give the yard workers?

Speedy trial....

Right to become a citizen, all them immigration regulations on Asians a century ago look so quaint and poorly conceived now.

Freedom of speech...

Perhaps what rights would you take away?

Get caught doing something illegal and we can send them to prison in Cuba as an enemy combatant...

Try to intercept paycheck money leavong the country....this will give the hard worming fellas more incentive to bring their families here and stay to better my country.

More ideas?


----------



## William Joyce (Jul 4, 2011)

Courts do say this, but common sense doesn't.  In America, common sense is racist.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 4, 2011)

> That is the problem?



No, it protects all persons rights, citizen and non-citizen. 

In _Plyler_ the court ruled that the designation of a person by a government agency, such as DHS, does not trump the Constitution and due process. Illegal aliens are innocent until proven guilty, as with anyone else. 

This is important because *we do not want government agencies, politicians, and bureaucrats deciding who is a citizen and who is not, who is entitled to his rights and who is not. *

That would destroy all of our civil liberties and the Republic itself.


----------



## Momanohedhunter (Jul 4, 2011)

Wolfmoon said:


> Where does it say in the Constitution that the citizens of La Republic of Mexico shall enjoy the rights of American citizens?
> 
> Where does it say that border jumpers will be given the same benefits of the American citizens and that the American citizens shall enjoy paying for those said benefits?
> 
> Stand up America and get a back bone and demand our politicians deport illegal aliens and close the ports and borders.  Or we will vote them out of office!



Its happening.


----------



## brono921 (Jul 4, 2011)

_we do not want government agencies, politicians, and bureaucrats deciding who is a citizen and who is not_
Ehhhh.........Hello?
Department of Immigration & Citizenship


----------



## Wolfmoon (Jul 4, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > *Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
> ...


 
Two-thirds of illegal aliens lack a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, into their legal status or heavy use of most social services. 
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/he98030.pdf


----------



## Toronado3800 (Jul 4, 2011)

Wolfmoon said:


> Toronado3800 said:
> 
> 
> > LilOlLady said:
> ...



Oh yeah, the average illegal from Mexico is under educated. Their old country sucks. No disagreement there.

I would like to see illegals paid our minimum wage. Take away some economic incentive from corporations like Tyson Chicken who import them.

So, um, would you like to take away citizenship rights from their anchor babies I take it?


----------



## Kuros (Jul 5, 2011)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > That is the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's a powerful argument for Plyler v. Doe.  After all, many children of illegal immigrants are themselves Americans.  

But you and I both know that the reason you bolded isn't the Constitutional test.  Illegal immigrants are not a suspect class.  Thus, rational basis should be applied.  Under rational basis scrutiny, the court should defer to any conceivably valid reason given by the legislature for the law.  Rational basis with bite was actually applied.  The majority gave excellent policy reasons for why the Texas statute was short-sighted.  But that should not convince us that the legislature had no good reason whatsoever to pass this law.  

There was a rational basis supporting the tuition charged in Plyler: the illegal immigrants' parents were not assuredly paying taxes, but charging their children tuition would assuredly save money.  



			
				Justice Burger said:
			
		

> Once it is conceded - as the Court does - that illegal aliens are not a suspect class, and that education is not a fundamental right, our inquiry should focus on and be limited to whether the legislative classification at issue bears a rational relationship to a legitimate state purpose.
> 
> The State contends primarily that 21.031 serves to prevent undue depletion of its limited revenues available for education, and to preserve the fiscal integrity of the State's school-financing system against an ever-increasing flood of illegal aliens - aliens over whose entry or continued presence it has no control. Of course such fiscal concerns alone could not justify discrimination against a suspect class or an arbitrary and irrational denial of benefits to a particular group of persons. Yet I assume no Member of this Court would argue that prudent conservation of finite state revenues is per se an illegitimate goal. Indeed, the numerous classifications this Court has sustained in social welfare legislation were invariably related to the limited amount of revenues available to spend on any given program or set of programs. See, e. g., Jefferson v. Hackney, 406 U.S., at 549 -551; Dandridge v. Williams, supra, at 487. The significant question here is whether the requirement of tuition from illegal aliens who attend the public schools - as well as from residents of other states, for example - is a rational and reasonable means of furthering the State's legitimate fiscal ends. 10   [457 U.S. 202, 250]
> 
> Without laboring what will undoubtedly seem obvious to many, it simply is not "irrational" for a state to conclude that it does not have the same responsibility to provide benefits for persons whose very presence in the state and this country is illegal as it does to provide for persons lawfully present. By definition, illegal aliens have no right whatever to be here, and the state may reasonably, and constitutionally, elect not to provide them with governmental services at the expense of those who are lawfully in the state. 11 In De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. 351, 357 (1976), we held that a State may protect its "fiscal interests and lawfully resident labor force from the deleterious effects on its economy resulting from the employment of illegal aliens." And only recently this Court made clear that a State has a legitimate interest in protecting and preserving the quality of its schools and "the right of its own bona fide residents to attend such institutions on a preferential tuition basis." Vlandis v. Kline, 412 U.S. 441, 453 (1973) (emphasis added). See also Elkins v. Moreno, 435 U.S. 647, 663 -668 (1978). The Court has failed to offer even a plausible explanation why illegality of residence [457 U.S. 202, 251]   in this country is not a factor that may legitimately bear upon the bona fides of state residence and entitlement to the benefits of lawful residence.



I can understand why people are upset about this ruling.


----------



## Momanohedhunter (Jul 5, 2011)

Wolfmoon said:


> Toronado3800 said:
> 
> 
> > LilOlLady said:
> ...



Not to mention H1N1 flu and drug resistant tuberculosis.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Jul 5, 2011)

LilOlLady said:


> *Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
> *Courts Have Ruled They Do*
> By Robert Longley,
> 
> ...



If your not a United States Citizen you do not receive the same rights as american citizens, you also dont share in their burdens (taxes) and responsibilities (voting).

Or maybe I should say "should not" instead of "do not"


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 5, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > *Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
> ...



What gives a hard working lawn worker the right to be here? That he wants a better life than he had in Mexico? Lot of people want a better life but can we let them all ignore our immigraiton laws and enter as they wish? And what part of illegal do you not understand?
I would just take away their right to be here and deport them. Before they become one of those who are killing 15 Americans daily and raping 8 children.  *Crime prevention*. Hard working illegal aliens have already killed more American than 9-11, Iraqi and Afghanistan war.


----------



## tonystewart1 (Jul 5, 2011)

If you take the 14th admendment and hold it at the right angle wearing your special liberal blinders then yes the contititution does give them the rights of american citizens.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Jul 5, 2011)

Too much truth in this thread for the MediaMatters Sorros crew to post in here (Hi TruthMatters and CO)


----------



## Kuros (Jul 5, 2011)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > *Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?*
> ...



Illegal immigrants, like everyone else, should definitely receive procedural Due Process rights (we'll agree to disagree on substantive due process rights).  They should be entitled to a trial, confrontation rights, protection against cruel and unusual punishment, etc.


----------



## Wolfmoon (Jul 5, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> Wolfmoon said:
> 
> 
> > Toronado3800 said:
> ...


 
Now that you mention it, revoking citizenship from Anchor Babies sounds like a wonderful idea. Foreign diplomats children born in America don't get automatic citizenship, why should people from a shithole country like Mexico get birthright citizenship. We need to get busy and End Birthright Citizenship for illegal aliens.

An illegal alien parent receives welfare benefits on behalf of his or her U.S. citizen child. Regardless of the parents immigration status may receive welfare and other benefits. When such a child receives assistance, the aid also helps support the childs family. 

SOURCE: 
Illegal Aliens Extent of Welfare Benefits, Page 1. 
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/he98030.pdf

.


----------



## Wolfmoon (Jul 5, 2011)

IMO, Why is it that the pro-illegal alien supporters think that illegal aliens are exempt from American laws? We're a nation built on the rule of law. If the laws say everyone drive a certain way then everyone must obey or face the consequences. Are the illegal aliens so stupid that they can't comprehend that concept? 

Do their supports feel if they bend and break the laws and call it right it makes it so? Americans wake up and start dealing with this bull shit and demand that the lawmakers enforce the laws already on the books regarding illegal immigration.

Why are the illegal aliens above you? Why do they get to break the federal laws and not be punished and you don't get to break the federal laws and you go to jail. Who's frickin' country is this anyway. Grab the politicians by the short hairs and don't stop pulling until they come to their senses. Its time to start deporting illegal aliens and End Birthright Citizenship. We cant afford their cheap labor any longer!


----------



## California Girl (Jul 5, 2011)

The Constitution is not a world wide document. It belongs to Americans. This may come as a shock to some Americans but the rest of the world does not want to be held to our Constitution. Only the arrogance of the US Government and Courts think that we have the right to apply our Constitution to non-Americans.

It's ours, not theirs. Nobody died and made us Ruler of the World.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Jul 5, 2011)

> But you and I both know that the reason you bolded isn't the Constitutional test.



You missed the point of the bold, Im afraid  and Ill take ownership for that. 

Consider: 

As you know there are those who wish to repeal the 14th Amendment; or reconfigure the Constitution in some way as to prevent citizenship at birth, thus removing an incentive to those entering the country illegally. That would indeed result in bureaucrats and politicians determining citizenship with disastrous results. If the government had the power to give citizenship to persons born here per some legislative criteria, it would also have the power to take it away. 

With the very foundation upon which our rights are based  our existence as humans, as persons in any sense of the term  destroyed, all of our rights could be taken by legislative action. Everyone could thus become a suspect class, and the level of review irrelevant.


----------



## Wolfmoon (Jul 5, 2011)

Get rid of the benefits for the Jackpot Babies (Anchor Babies) and you wouldn't see so many illegal aliens rushing to this country. We have to *End Birthright Citizenship.* They hit the Jackpot every time they pop a kid and the U.S. taxpayer pays through the nose for them! They come for the benefits not the jobs. Free housing, free food, free medical, free education... They're also overcrowding our jails and prisons and using the taxpayer funded legal system, very expensive! 

When the government gives them welfare they don't feel it's enough to just support the Anchor baby alone, they give them enough to support the whole family regardless of their immigration status.

I bet you didn't know you're supporting illegal alien families with your paychecks. That's dang white of you people. 

An illegal alien parent receives welfare benefits on behalf of his or her U.S. citizen child. Regardless of the parents immigration status may receive welfare and other benefits. When such a child receives assistance, the aid also helps support the childs family. 

SOURCE: 
Illegal Aliens Extent of Welfare Benefits, Page 1. 
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/he98030.pdf


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 5, 2011)

AFDC is Aid to Families of Dependent Children is no different than any American that receive welfare. It does not give to the parents but ony to the children and it substains them the same way. Food stamps, Medcaid and public housing and I belive subsidized housing. It can be a quite sizable amount if there are several chldren. It is the anchor baby problem that is bankrupting this country.


----------



## American Cowboy (Jul 5, 2011)

> Do Illegal Aliens Have Constitutional Rights?



Some but not all


----------



## theHawk (Jul 6, 2011)

There are certain "unalienable rights" that pertain to all human beings.  No denying that.

Clearly though, not all US Constitutional rights are "unalienable rights" that can or should pertain to everyone.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2011)

LilOlLady said:


> AFDC is Aid to Families of Dependent Children is no different than any American that receive welfare. It does not give to the parents but ony to the children and it substains them the same way. Food stamps, Medcaid and public housing and I belive subsidized housing. It can be a quite sizable amount if there are several chldren. It is the anchor baby problem that is bankrupting this country.



These programs are not an open ended entitlement. Which means that you must get a job or lose the benefits, which will be phased out when you get a job.
Please educate yourself. The illegals do work. That is why they are here. ANchor babies are not bankrupting the US of A. The great recession is.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2011)

theHawk said:


> There are certain "unalienable rights" that pertain to all human beings.  No denying that.
> 
> Clearly though, not all US Constitutional rights are "unalienable rights" that can or should pertain to everyone.



They are not. that is just the whole point. The only protection under the law is, due process.


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 6, 2011)

Moonglow said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > AFDC is Aid to Families of Dependent Children is no different than any American that receive welfare. It does not give to the parents but ony to the children and it substains them the same way. Food stamps, Medcaid and public housing and I belive subsidized housing. It can be a quite sizable amount if there are several chldren. It is the anchor baby problem that is bankrupting this country.
> ...




There are, putting it mildly, 12 million illegal aliens in this country and only 7.2 million in the workforce and only 2% working on farms. What are the others doing? Ever been to the welfare office? 

You get a job and then lose benefits. Mothers with young children don't have to work. Majority of women come here to have anchor babies to support them.
Illegal aliens directly contribute to the recession. Taking jobs 14 million unemployed american need. Put a strain on our education system and bankrupt hundrend of hospitals. Cost of incarcerations, gang and grafitti units and theif from employers.

*The children of illegal aliens (anchor babies) have bankrupted the state of California*
In August 2009, Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich made public the staggering amount which the *taxpayers spend on illegal aliens*, living in L.A. County. Last June alone, the *county paid out $48 million to the children of illegal aliens, an increase of $10 million over June 2007*.
http://www.thenationalpolicyinstitu...bies-have-bankrupted-the-state-of-california/


Still don

Number of Illegal Immigrants Hits 12M


----------



## LilOlLady (Jul 6, 2011)

Moonglow,


Q&A: *Illegal Immigrants and the U.S. Economy*
by Adam Davidson



Advocates on both sides of the immigration debate predict *dramatic change if illegal immigration is drastically curtailed*. Supporters of a crackdown argue that the *U.S. economy would benefit if illegal immigrants were to leave*, because *U.S. employers would be forced to raise wages to attract American workers.* Critics of this approach say the loss of illegal immigrants would stall the U.S. economy, saying undocumented workers do many *jobs few native-born Americans will do*. NPR business correspondent Adam Davidson explores the issue.

Q&A: Illegal Immigrants and the U.S. Economy : NPR


Americans would do those jobs if illegal aliens were not doing them. WTF did them before illegal aliens were 20 million illegal aliens were here doing them? Raids on McDonald, meat packing companies, resturants, etc has proved when raided, Americans lined up for those jobs alleged they would not do. Ever watched Dirty Jobs?


----------



## Sallow (Jul 6, 2011)

LilOlLady said:


> *Immigrants' Rights*
> *No Human Being Is Illegal*
> 
> 
> ...



I think the last count was around 11 million..down from 12 (or 13?) million from the Bush era.

Obama's been working double time to send illegals back.

And yet you guys continue to yammer on about this.


----------



## Sallow (Jul 6, 2011)

LilOlLady said:


> Moonglow,
> 
> 
> Q&A: *Illegal Immigrants and the U.S. Economy*
> ...



No they wouldn't. As former business owners..my brother and I can both attest to this. My cousin, who owns a business in California, knows this too.

At my bar..I didn't hire illegals..and actually WOUND UP DOING most of the work that a lower income person wouldn't do..myself. Same with my brother. And same with my cousin.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 6, 2011)

How can someone not from the US have constitutional rights?


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 6, 2011)

Sallow said:


> LilOlLady said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow,
> ...



I would do some of that work for you if I got some free Hennessy and chicken wings.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Jul 6, 2011)

Kuros said:


> PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> 
> 
> > LilOlLady said:
> ...



I think all people should have that but, in reality, people here illegally do not receive such protections as they are not citizens and not entitled to them.  They are entitled to being dropped off with the authorities of their own country for being here illegally.  

In other situations where they did break more than our immigration laws, say an assult charge, then yes I agree to them going to court as a criminal for trial and them having this done within the protections our courts grant individuals for that charge.


----------



## Kuros (Jul 8, 2011)

PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:


> Kuros said:
> 
> 
> > PLYMCO_PILGRIM said:
> ...



In reality, people here illegaly DO receive such protections.  

Fact Check: Illegal Immigrants have rights



> [T]he Fourteenth Amendment is not confined to the protection of citizens. The amendment says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



DPC and EPC; procedural and substantive due process, apply both to illegal aliens.


----------



## AmericanFirst (Jul 9, 2011)

No they don't. The courts do not always make the right decision.


----------



## St.Blues (Jul 11, 2011)

They should have a right to a speedy trial and a quick execution.


----------



## Kuros (Jul 12, 2011)

AmericanFirst said:


> No they don't. The courts do not always make the right decision.



You're absolutely right.  Often the Supreme Court does make the wrong decision.  

But please read the wording of the DPC and EPC:



> Nor shall any state deprive *any person* of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor deny to *any person* within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.



You would need extensive legislative history to contradict such plain and clear meaning.  The drafters of the 14th Amendment made no distinction between citizen or non-citizen, legal resident alien or undocumented alien.  Thus, the Court is not free to do so.


----------

