Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
These are non-citizens that are not here.
Are you arguing that they have constitutional rights ?
Really ?
Nothing is ever settled.
Everything like this challenged time and time again.
Look at the terrible Citizens United.
There was nothing terrible about Citizens United.
O.K.
We have different opinions.
This is about whether or not the OP is really trying to say that the Constitution reaches out to people who don't live her, who are not citizens, and who are not physically here.
It does to people who have been granted permanent residence, visas, not so much.
The Constitution does not reach to you as a U.S. Citizen if you are visiting another country and violate it's laws.
How do these idiots think it applies to people in other countries.
Lol... Bet you didn't know that you can be charged with a U.S. crime in another country did you? For example if you go to Thailand and have sex with a 12 year old, even if you aren't found guilty in Thailand, you can be brought back to the U.S. and be charged with being a pedophile.
But the U.S. laws are distinct from other countries, not sure why you are trying to compare us to them.
Wait...so there isn't any?Link to these airport people?We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
If you haven't been watching the news and seeing stories of people with Visas stuck at U.S. airports not allowed to leave and enter the country, that's on you. It was literally plastered on the news.
And all have been resolved.
Yes... because of volunteer layers and the stay on the ban by the judge.
But we are not a nation of illegal immigrants....Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
These are non-citizens that are not here.
Are you arguing that they have constitutional rights ?
Really ?
Please read carefully. Please try your damnedest to use reading comprehension and note the bolded area...
"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."
Please take notice how it changes from citizens of the United States to ANY PERSON... that was done on purpose... because we are a nation of immigrants... it was intentional... do you understand that?
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.
Hey asswipe (Lakhota),
Are you saying that the constitution applies to people who.
1. Are not here physically.
2. Are not citizens.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
Ok, I'm confused.
When did we start talking about people at an airport, that have VISAs and were vetted?
When I clicked on the title of this thread, is said:
"Yes, illegal aliens have constitutional rights"
Are you telling me, that Illegal aliens, are vetted, given VISAs and show up on an airplane flight?
Maybe I missed the post were then entire topic of the thread was changed?
There was nothing terrible about Citizens United.
O.K.
We have different opinions.
This is about whether or not the OP is really trying to say that the Constitution reaches out to people who don't live her, who are not citizens, and who are not physically here.
It does to people who have been granted permanent residence, visas, not so much.
The Constitution does not reach to you as a U.S. Citizen if you are visiting another country and violate it's laws.
How do these idiots think it applies to people in other countries.
Lol... Bet you didn't know that you can be charged with a U.S. crime in another country did you? For example if you go to Thailand and have sex with a 12 year old, even if you aren't found guilty in Thailand, you can be brought back to the U.S. and be charged with being a pedophile.
But the U.S. laws are distinct from other countries, not sure why you are trying to compare us to them.
Please link to something that backs your claim about the U.S. being able to prosecute you.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
These are non-citizens that are not here.
Are you arguing that they have constitutional rights ?
Really ?
Please read carefully. Please try your damnedest to use reading comprehension and note the bolded area...
"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."
Please take notice how it changes from citizens of the United States to ANY PERSON... that was done on purpose... because we are a nation of immigrants... it was intentional... do you understand that?
Yes, and that includes "illegal aliens" on American soil according to the OP - as stated in Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Which did not include the Native Americans who were here before we came.
Hey asswipe (Lakhota),
Are you saying that the constitution applies to people who.
1. Are not here physically.
2. Are not citizens.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
Link to these airport people?Hey asswipe (Lakhota),
Are you saying that the constitution applies to people who.
1. Are not here physically.
2. Are not citizens.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
If you haven't been watching the news and seeing stories of people with Visas stuck at U.S. airports not allowed to leave and enter the country, that's on you. It was literally plastered on the news.
And all have been resolved.
Yes... because of volunteer layers and the stay on the ban by the judge.
Yes, and that includes "illegal aliens" on American soil according to the OP - as stated in Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Which did not include the Native Americans who were here before we came.
But we are not a nation of illegal immigrants....These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
These are non-citizens that are not here.
Are you arguing that they have constitutional rights ?
Really ?
Please read carefully. Please try your damnedest to use reading comprehension and note the bolded area...
"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."
Please take notice how it changes from citizens of the United States to ANY PERSON... that was done on purpose... because we are a nation of immigrants... it was intentional... do you understand that?
I don't know where the "not here" came from, the op said illegal aliens, people here illegally. I think the idea that they have rights speaks to the idea that raping or killing them is still illegal, they are not non-human.I don't see the problem here. They are owed due process, they have broken the law by entering the country illegally, once found guilty deport them. What's the issue?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.
If they haven't even come here...? Rights ? Don't tihnk so.
Yes, and that includes "illegal aliens" on American soil according to the OP - as stated in Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Which did not include the Native Americans who were here before we came.
What about blacks and women. BTW, early whites didn't even consider Native Americans as human beings.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
Again.... when was there ever a ban? 90 days, is not a 'ban'. Is the California gun purchase waiting period, called a 'gun ban' in your world?
Where is this "ban" idea coming from?
And WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ILLEGALS?! Nothing being said fits with the title of thread!
Illegal is illegal.... are you saying Trump banned something already illegal? If so.... WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM!?!? Gah.... mind numbing ignorance flying around this thread.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
These are non-citizens that are not here.
Are you arguing that they have constitutional rights ?
Really ?
Please read carefully. Please try your damnedest to use reading comprehension and note the bolded area...
"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."
Please take notice how it changes from citizens of the United States to ANY PERSON... that was done on purpose... because we are a nation of immigrants... it was intentional... do you understand that?
Yes, and that includes "illegal aliens" on American soil according to the OP - as stated in Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Which did not include the Native Americans who were here before we came.
What about blacks and women. BTW, early whites didn't even consider Native Americans as human beings.
Yes, and that includes "illegal aliens" on American soil according to the OP - as stated in Section One of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Which did not include the Native Americans who were here before we came.
What about blacks and women. BTW, early whites didn't even consider Native Americans as human beings.
Early Native Americans didn't consider whites as human beings.
Hey asswipe (Lakhota),
Are you saying that the constitution applies to people who.
1. Are not here physically.
2. Are not citizens.
We are talking about people that ARE here at the airports, and people that have already been vetted under the old process and given Visas.
Have they passed immigration ?
These people have already gotten their Visas through the process... and Trump wants to void them based on their country of origin.
He has that authority.
No, no he doesn't, thus why the judge was able to block his ban.
