Yes, illegal aliens have constitutional rights

[bripat9643]

I'm going to post this one more time since you have a problem reading...

"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."

You're apparently not paying attention to the words not in red here. Now, let's go through it...

Nor shall any state... (you know, like Nebraska, Georgia, Wyoming...) deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process.

So states cannot deprive persons of life, liberty and property unless they give them due process.

Nor deny any person within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So this does not apply to a Syrian in an airport in Syria. It applies to illegal aliens but the state doesn't prosecute illegal aliens. It also doesn't bestow constitutional rights on illegal aliens, it just says states have to give them due process.

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

That's not the same thing as "full constitutional rights."

 

[Lakhota]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

 

[bripat9643]

These words, from Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution rank along with the Constitution's Bill of Rights as — in these precincts — the most important in world and American history:

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.​

The critics all claim that undocumented workers or immigrants or migrants — whichever label is the flavor of the day — don't have legal rights because they are lawbreakers by entering the country illegally and owe no loyalty to the United States. They claim that only U.S. citizens (natural born or naturalized) are protected by the Constitution. The critics are not only wrong — they are really, truly and sincerely wrong.

The U.S. Supreme Court settled the issue well over a century ago. But even before the court laid the issue to rest, a principal author of the Constitution, James Madison, the second president of the United States, wrote: "that as they [aliens], owe, on the one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their [constitutional] protection and advantage."

More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) that "due process" of the 14th Amendment applies to all aliens in the United States whose presence maybe or is "unlawful, involuntary or transitory."

In summary, the entire case of illegal aliens being covered by and protected by the Constitution has been settled law for 129 years and rests on one word: "person." It is the word "person" that connects the dots of "due process" and "equal protection" in the 14th Amendment to the U.S Constitution and it is those five words that make the Constitution of the United States and its 14th amendment the most important political document since the Magna Carta in all world history.

"Aliens," legal and illegal, have the full panoply of constitutional protections American citizens have with three exceptions: voting, some government jobs and gun ownership (and that is now in doubt) — Glenn Beck and others notwithstanding.

More w/Supporting Cases: Yes, illegal aliens have constitutional rights

That should be clear enough for everyone to understand.

Wrong again, asshole. Your critics claim that foreigners not residing on U.S. soil have no Constitutional rights. That point is irrefutable.

Duh, that don't make no sense to me...

You think Syrians currently residing in Syria have rights under the U.S. Constitution?

 

[bripat9643]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

No they don't. The law specifically says that the president can deny them a visa for any reason he chooses.

 

[Lakhota]

I'm going to post this one more time since you have a problem reading...

"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."

You're apparently not paying attention to the words not in red here. Now, let's go through it...

Nor shall any state... (you know, like Nebraska, Georgia, Wyoming...) deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process.

So states cannot deprive persons of life, liberty and property unless they give them due process.

Nor deny any person within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So this does not apply to a Syrian in an airport in Syria. It applies to illegal aliens but the state doesn't prosecute illegal aliens. It also doesn't bestow constitutional rights on illegal aliens, it just says states have to give them due process.

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

That's not the same thing as "full constitutional rights."

Your reading comprehension is pitiful. No one said they have "full constitutional rights". But they do have the right to due process according to Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

 

[Lakhota]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

No they don't. The law specifically says that the president can deny them a visa for any reason he chooses.

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

 

[Boss]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"?

Did I miss something? Wasn't that the purpose and argument of the OP?

""Aliens," legal and illegal, have the full panoply of constitutional protections American citizens have with three exceptions: voting, some government jobs and gun ownership." ​

That is what YOU posted.

Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

Most of the liberal left who thinks it applies to Muslim aliens waiting in airports to travel to the US.

Let's clarify... The Federal Constitution says STATES have to afford persons "due process" and that is all. The Fed is obligated to protect due process for citizens and foreign nationals residing here. Through statutory law, it also extends due process to aliens here illegally. "Due process" is FAR from full Constitutional rights.

Also.. "due process" is not defined and can be ambiguous. Judge Roy Bean probably had a much different idea than say, Ruth Bader Ginsberg... just guessing. This is why statutory laws were needed to clearly define what IS due process.

 

[Boss]

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

No.. HE really isn't. HE wasn't this time. His EO was.

You need to go read your Constitution, specifically, Articles I, II and III. There are specific powers granted to each branch of the government. We call this "separation of powers" and each branch has their own responsibilities without regard for the other two.

What would you think if a President said... "I'm going to pass a bill!"? And he just writes up a bill and says... This is now the law of the land! Can he do that? Well, that's actually what Obama did with DOCA and DOPA, but Constitutionally, that's a no-no.... the Congress is where bills are passed. Okay... what if Congress said... you know what? We don't like Roe v. Wade, so we're going to overrule it! Is that okay? No... you see, they CAN'T do that Constitutionally. Just like the Courts can't say the president doesn't have the authority to do what the Constitution says he has the authority to do. They simply have no oversight when it comes to enumerated powers of the other two branches.

 

[Andylusion]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

Yes, and the president has the right to change the rules. That is a presidential ability.

 

[Lakhota]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

Yes, and the president has the right to change the rules. That is a presidential ability.

Subject to court review - and maybe even input from Congress.

 

[P@triot]

Bwahahahahaha! It's only February and already Lakhota takes home the award for "Dumbest Thread of 2017". Sweetie...the U.S. Constitution is not an international document. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

My constitutional rights do not travel with me when I land in France. Likewise, a Mexican coming here does not have a single constitutional right. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

Dear Retarded Dumbass: Where did I say it applied to anyone not on American soil? Please read the OP.

Dear Dumbocrat who pretends to be appalled by language which isn't "inclusive" and then goes around calling people "retard" as a derogatory term in an attempt to insult them:

Please read my post again. It stated that the U.S. Constitution applies to Americans only on American soil only. IE anyone who steps on U.S. soil that is not a citizen is not entitled to received protections from the U.S. Constitution. They might receive them out of courtesy - but they are not entitled to them.

You are truly a very special kind of stupid. And you show your true feelings about people who are handicapped. Typical repulsive Dumbocrat.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

Yes, and the president has the right to change the rules. That is a presidential ability.

Subject to court review - and maybe even input from Congress.

No, it isn't subject to court review.

 

[Lakhota]

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

No.. HE really isn't. HE wasn't this time. His EO was.

You need to go read your Constitution, specifically, Articles I, II and III. There are specific powers granted to each branch of the government. We call this "separation of powers" and each branch has their own responsibilities without regard for the other two.

What would you think if a President said... "I'm going to pass a bill!"? And he just writes up a bill and says... This is now the law of the land! Can he do that? Well, that's actually what Obama did with DOCA and DOPA, but Constitutionally, that's a no-no.... the Congress is where bills are passed. Okay... what if Congress said... you know what? We don't like Roe v. Wade, so we're going to overrule it! Is that okay? No... you see, they CAN'T do that Constitutionally. Just like the Courts can't say the president doesn't have the authority to do what the Constitution says he has the authority to do. They simply have no oversight when it comes to enumerated powers of the other two branches.

Funny. So-called enumerated powers may be subject to court review and maybe even input from Congress if the president is bending and stretching those powers - and ultimately the Supreme Court.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

No they don't. The law specifically says that the president can deny them a visa for any reason he chooses.

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

Wrong. The court has no authority to second guess the President's decision.

 

[Lakhota]

Bwahahahahaha! It's only February and already Lakhota takes home the award for "Dumbest Thread of 2017". Sweetie...the U.S. Constitution is not an international document. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

My constitutional rights do not travel with me when I land in France. Likewise, a Mexican coming here does not have a single constitutional right. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

Dear Retarded Dumbass: Where did I say it applied to anyone not on American soil? Please read the OP.

Dear Dumbocrat who pretends to be appalled by language which isn't "inclusive" and then goes around calling people "retard" as a derogatory term in an attempt to insult them:

Please read my post again. It stated that the U.S. Constitution applies to Americans only on American soil only. IE anyone who steps on U.S. soil that is not a citizen is not entitled to received protections from the U.S. Constitution. They might receive them out of courtesy - but they are not entitled to them.

You are truly a very special kind of stupid. And you show your true feelings about people who are handicapped. Typical repulsive Dumbocrat.

Funny. What is it about Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution that you can't understand - which doesn't say anything about "courtesy"? Holy shit...

 

[Lakhota]

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

No they don't. The law specifically says that the president can deny them a visa for any reason he chooses.

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

Wrong. The court has no authority to second guess the President's decision.

Two federal courts just did.

 

[Lakhota]

Our federal Constitution "says states have to give them due process"...

Yes, the federal Constitution says that states have to give "persons" due process. It doesn't define the limits or parameters of "due process" and so, we have a statutory law which outlines that. Giving illegal aliens due process is not giving them full Constitutional rights. Nowhere does the Constitution say that. It also doesn't say the Federal government has to give aliens not in our country due process or any other rights.

Who said the federal Constitution provides illegal aliens "full Constitutional rights"? Also, who's talking about "not in our country" - besides you?

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

Yes, and the president has the right to change the rules. That is a presidential ability.

He can't change the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

Bwahahahahaha! It's only February and already Lakhota takes home the award for "Dumbest Thread of 2017". Sweetie...the U.S. Constitution is not an international document. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

My constitutional rights do not travel with me when I land in France. Likewise, a Mexican coming here does not have a single constitutional right. It applies to U.S. citizens only on U.S. land only.

Dear Retarded Dumbass: Where did I say it applied to anyone not on American soil? Please read the OP.

Dear Dumbocrat who pretends to be appalled by language which isn't "inclusive" and then goes around calling people "retard" as a derogatory term in an attempt to insult them:

Please read my post again. It stated that the U.S. Constitution applies to Americans only on American soil only. IE anyone who steps on U.S. soil that is not a citizen is not entitled to received protections from the U.S. Constitution. They might receive them out of courtesy - but they are not entitled to them.

You are truly a very special kind of stupid. And you show your true feelings about people who are handicapped. Typical repulsive Dumbocrat.

Funny. What is it about Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution that you can't understand - which doesn't say anything about "courtesy"? Holy shit...

Where does it say that it covers foreigners who aren't currently residing on U.S. soil?

 

[bripat9643]

All you douche bags are claiming that so-called "refugees" have the right to immigrate here. That's obvious horseshit.

They do have the right to immigrate here if they follow the rules - but that's not what this thread is about.

No they don't. The law specifically says that the president can deny them a visa for any reason he chooses.

And if he does - he is subject to court review - like when his recent Muslim ban was overturned by two federal courts. BTW, this thread is about illegal aliens ALREADY on American soil.

Wrong. The court has no authority to second guess the President's decision.

Two federal courts just did.

You mean two gangs of leftwing partisan douche bags did. They will soon be overruled.

 

[Boss]

Subject to court review - and maybe even input from Congress.

Enumerated powers under the Constitution are NOT SUBJECT TO REVIEW!

It's like you are arguing... quite literally... that the court can "review" a Declaration of War by Congress! It cannot! It has no Constitutional jurisdiction. Declaring wars is an enumerated power granted to Congress and only to Congress... NOT THE COURT!