Why does the left think the Constitution applies to non-Americans?

[danielpalos]

jc456 It applies to any Thing, pursuant to our Constitution.

Why do you believe it doesn't?

 

[danielpalos]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

a Bill of Rights?

 

[danielpalos]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

14th amendment

The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to foreigners on foreign soil.

We have a Bill of Rights, in our very own, federal Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

the constitution applies to everyone on our soil....do some reading up on it.

HINT-this is why we had to set up GITMO, off our soil....

But they are NOT on our soil!

Catch a clue!

all laws must be necessary and proper, and pursuant to our federal Constitution.

the regime of the time, simply felt it expedient.

 

[danielpalos]

LOL and on cue they show up to reveal their lack o knowledge on the Constitution

Ever read the 14th Amendment, Bi-Catfish?

Here it is:
Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; 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 laws.

I put what you failed to consider in red text and underlined it.

How about those apples?

States have their own equivalent to equal protection of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

The Constitutions applies to Americans and LEGAL immigrants/tourists. This should be obvious.

How can our supreme law of the land, not apply to Any Person in the US?

 

[danielpalos]

Why does the left think the Constitution applies to non-Americans?

Well, I hate to highlight the obvious, but.....

Because it is our supreme law of the land?

 

[bripat9643]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

a Bill of Rights?

The Bill of Rights doesn't apply to them, moron. I already explained why.

 

[bripat9643]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

14th amendment

The 14th Amendment doesn't apply to foreigners on foreign soil.

We have a Bill of Rights, in our very own, federal Constitution.

True, and it doesn't apply to foreigners on foreign soil. Get that through your thick skull.

 

[bripat9643]

Why does the left think the Constitution applies to non-Americans?

Well, I hate to highlight the obvious, but.....

Because it is our supreme law of the land?

That's right, it's the law of our land, not Syria, Libya, Yemen or Somalia.

 

[danielpalos]

What was this "incredibly dangerous situation" that Obama left us in?

Which part about not doing anything about Nations that his own administration determined were not only inadequately screening and sharing said screening of travelers to the United States but are also historical origination points for radical IslamicTerrorists and/or State Sponsors of Terrorism other than making a list of them didn't you understand?

Their screening was strengthened, and they disallowed Brits and other friendly Nation's citizens from coming without going through the visa process if they were duel citizens from those countries, they stopped any Brit or friendly country citizens from coming here if they had traveled to any of those countries within the past 6 years, from coming here on a Visa Waiver, and made them go through the 18 month to 2 year plus, visa vetting process.

WHAT did Trump do to make us safer? He extended the process for 90 days? WOW! Did he tell us how they were going to strengthen the vetting process, or what they were going to do to make it stronger during those 90 days or even some sort of plan and why those 90 days was going to make a difference on these people?

and again, 15 of the 19 Sept 11th terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, and the San Bernadino wife was from Pakistan, and neither of those two countries were put on President Trump's ban.....and please, none of this blame Obama for Trump's fiasco.

It was hasty, it was ill advised and ill planned, and meant to cause chaos, for the ratings.....

Learn the difference in "dual "and "duel" lest you appear to be an ignorant troll. Oh, never mind! You are!

Boy you are on a real roll....who would have thunk you would post something so empty, just to get your post count up? You're fitting right in with rest of your RW counterparts...

You're a liar with no moral compass. I see far more leftists doing spelling check posts than anyone else and I've never seen you stand up to one of them as I stood up for you against someone I usually agree with. I consistently object to all spell check trolling. Your indignation is feigned. Vow to with me object to all spell check trolls and not make it another partisan issue for you as everything else is

you just need a full body massage with happy ending.

 

[danielpalos]

?---- Because the far left is Hell bent on destroying this nation as it was founded. And the best way is to dilute our sacred Constitution by applying it in ways it was never intended. Sorry it's not more complicated than that.

anything specific?

 

[danielpalos]

It's because the Constitution doesn't say it applies only to citizens. It applies to everyone in the USA.

That is, the lefties actually follow the Constitution, and the righties don't.

And, looking at this thread, the righties here are all very proud of not following the Constitution.

The left wants terrorists in other countries to be protected by our constitution. At the same time, they want American citizens denied 2nd Amendment rights. And they feel they can ignore federal immigration laws, which is not allowed. It also does not allow a president to ignore, change or create laws which Obama did with delaying parts of the ACA law and coming up with the DREAM act.

just right wing, national socialist propaganda.

 

[danielpalos]

To answer the simple (and dumb) question of the thread title: "Because it does apply to foreigners IN AMERICA."

It applies to foreign nationals and I've admitted that is a flaw in the title. I can't edit the title of the thread or I would. All I can do is post a correction, which I have.

The OP is referring to people who are not foreign nationals or citizens.

It is one OR the other; it cannot be none.

 

[danielpalos]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

a Bill of Rights?

The Bill of Rights doesn't apply to them, moron. I already explained why.

No, you haven't. Are you merely indulging, right wing fantasy?

How can our supreme law of the land, not apply to any Person in our Republic?

 

[bripat9643]

I keep hearing this asinine argument from the left and it drives me nuts. Where in the hell do they get this concept that our Constitution is supposed to apply to everyone in the world and not just American citizens? Over and over, we come up on this issue of constitutionality and they consistently want to apply it to people who aren't subject to it. We cannot enforce our Constitution worldwide so we can't apply it that way. It's really as simple as that.

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution. And guess what else? That's not ALWAYS an absolute!

Many of our constitutional rights have limitations and restrictions. If an American citizen travels to Mexico and returns, they aren't protected by the 4th Amendment against being searched and having property seized. We suspend that right at the border for national security reasons. We've determined that is "reasonable" and so the Amendment doesn't apply. And that's for an American citizen who IS protected by the Constitution!

There is nothing unconstitutional about Trump's executive order on restricting entry into the US. The President has plenary power granted under the Constitution and many presidents before him have used precisely the same plenary power to do the same thing. It's not a "Muslim ban" but guess what else? He's within his authority to make it one if he wants to! There is no restriction on this, the President has plenary power and he can make this effective for any country or ALL countries if he so chooses. He can make it against a specific religion... he can make it against people with red hair! There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits him in any way with this. You may not LIKE it... but he has that authority under the Constitution.

Because a government empowered to strip people of their rights based on their 'papers' is a threat to everyone. Most especially its own citizens.

What "rights" do foreigners residing on foreign soil have in America?

a Bill of Rights?

The Bill of Rights doesn't apply to them, moron. I already explained why.

No, you haven't. Are you merely indulging, right wing fantasy?

How can our supreme law of the land, not apply to any Person in our Republic?

We're discussing people who aren't on US soil, moron.

 

[Care4all]

What was this "incredibly dangerous situation" that Obama left us in?

Which part about not doing anything about Nations that his own administration determined were not only inadequately screening and sharing said screening of travelers to the United States but are also historical origination points for radical IslamicTerrorists and/or State Sponsors of Terrorism other than making a list of them didn't you understand?

Their screening was strengthened, and they disallowed Brits and other friendly Nation's citizens from coming without going through the visa process if they were duel citizens from those countries, they stopped any Brit or friendly country citizens from coming here if they had traveled to any of those countries within the past 6 years, from coming here on a Visa Waiver, and made them go through the 18 month to 2 year plus, visa vetting process.

WHAT did Trump do to make us safer? He extended the process for 90 days? WOW! Did he tell us how they were going to strengthen the vetting process, or what they were going to do to make it stronger during those 90 days or even some sort of plan and why those 90 days was going to make a difference on these people?

and again, 15 of the 19 Sept 11th terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, and the San Bernadino wife was from Pakistan, and neither of those two countries were put on President Trump's ban.....and please, none of this blame Obama for Trump's fiasco.

It was hasty, it was ill advised and ill planned, and meant to cause chaos, for the ratings.....

Learn the difference in "dual "and "duel" lest you appear to be an ignorant troll. Oh, never mind! You are!

Boy you are on a real roll....who would have thunk you would post something so empty, just to get your post count up? You're fitting right in with rest of your RW counterparts...

You're a liar with no moral compass. I see far more leftists doing spelling check posts than anyone else and I've never seen you stand up to one of them as I stood up for you against someone I usually agree with. I consistently object to all spell check trolling. Your indignation is feigned. Vow to with me object to all spell check trolls and not make it another partisan issue for you as everything else is

Huh?

Did they do it to me?

I am not here to babysit for anyone else...if they don't like being spell checked and insulted, they can fend for themselves.

And I was not upset with the Admiral for spell checking me, I appreciate being corrected when I spell something wrong...I was upset with the snarky remark...it tends to cut off any real legitimate debate between two posters, before it even starts...

 

[JQPublic1]

Any foreigner residing or traveling within the USA legally is subject to all laws and jurisdictions wherever he goes. Conversely, it is essential that protections afforded by our Constitution be extended as well. For instance: Foreigners accused of crimes such as murder or rape have no immunity against prosecution and the requisite due process that follows. Due process is crucial, and it IS a cornerstone of the Constitution.

There is no separate process for non citizens arrested for serious crimes, they too are entitled to have a lawyer and a trial before being deprived of the same liberties that citizens enjoy.

Now, if a foreigner, such as a tourist, is victimized, even by another foreigner on American soil
both victim and perpetrator are subject to US law and Constitutional protections.

Without protection, what tourist would venture to our shores with family in tow, knowing the risk of having no redress for grievances launched on their behalf.

 

[Boss]

Any foreigner residing or traveling within the USA legally is subject to all laws and jurisdictions wherever he goes. Conversely, it is essential that protections afforded by our Constitution be extended as well. For instance: Foreigners accused of crimes such as murder or rape have no immunity against prosecution and the requisite due process that follows. Due process is crucial, and it IS a cornerstone of the Constitution.

There is no separate process for non citizens arrested for serious crimes, they too are entitled to have a lawyer and a trial before being deprived of the same liberties that citizens enjoy.

Now, if a foreigner, such as a tourist, is victimized, even by another foreigner on American soil
both victim and perpetrator are subject to US law and Constitutional protections.

Without protection, what tourist would venture to our shores with family in tow, knowing the risk of having no redress for grievances launched on their behalf.

You are describing "foreign nationals" and no one is advocating they not be given Constitutional protections or due process rights. This has been litigated by SCOTUS and a matter of law. Again... the point of the OP is regarding people who are not in our country. Or... people who are awaiting allowance into our country at the airports or borders.

You are absolutely correct that due process is the cornerstone of our Constitution, which is precisely why it cannot be applied to persons outside of our country. We cannot enforce due process in another country, therefore, the Constitution cannot apply.

 

[JQPublic1]

Any foreigner residing or traveling within the USA legally is subject to all laws and jurisdictions wherever he goes. Conversely, it is essential that protections afforded by our Constitution be extended as well. For instance: Foreigners accused of crimes such as murder or rape have no immunity against prosecution and the requisite due process that follows. Due process is crucial, and it IS a cornerstone of the Constitution.

There is no separate process for non citizens arrested for serious crimes, they too are entitled to have a lawyer and a trial before being deprived of the same liberties that citizens enjoy.

Now, if a foreigner, such as a tourist, is victimized, even by another foreigner on American soil
both victim and perpetrator are subject to US law and Constitutional protections.

Without protection, what tourist would venture to our shores with family in tow, knowing the risk of having no redress for grievances launched on their behalf.

You are describing "foreign nationals" and no one is advocating they not be given

Constitutional protections or due process rights. This has been litigated by SCOTUS and a matter of law. Again... the point of the OP is regarding people who are not in our country. Or... people who are awaiting allowance into our country at the airports or borders.

You are absolutely correct that due process is the cornerstone of our Constitution, which is precisely why it cannot be applied to persons outside of our country. We cannot enforce due process in another country, therefore, the Constitution cannot apply.

I agree that the Constitution does not apply outside of the USA but your second paragraph is worrisome:

Then they want to make this silly argument about being "on American soil" ...as if, a radical jihadist could parachute into the country and as soon as his feet hits the ground he has instantaneous constitutional rights! That's not how it works. We are a humane nation who believes in basic human rights for everyone, and so we believe in treating people in accordance with basic human decency but that has nothing to do with constitutional rights. It is only the citizens of the United States who are protected by the Constitution.

Here you seem to have taken an opposing position to the one you tout now. Originally you apparently didn't think the Constitution applied to foreigners on American soil under any circumstances and that any justice they receive is bestowed in the interest of human rights rather than Constitutional rights. I don't accept that position, especially when the foreigner is the perpetrator of a serious crime. If you have changed your perspective since you wrote the second paragraph, I applaud you. If you haven't , please explain.