It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Constitution Protects Illegal Immigrants..It's Their Out On This

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
So I am reading that the immigration law which was recently signed will be fought tooth and nail by activist groups.

I was in a debate with someone over the protections or "rights" the Illegal Immigrant activist groups claim. Some say they have 'basic' rights. Some say they have more. In fact, I have read a lot of claims they are provided almost all the rights we have while IN OUR COUNTRY.

That they are considered to be "resident" aliens, even if here illegally. The semantics for the words "any Person shall" was assumed to mean "Citizen". But the SCOTUS found that the Constitution was talking about any LIVING PERSON on our soil, has rights. This is what I have found so far.

So now Illegal Immigrants with the help of any and all "Rights Groups" will use the Constitution against us whenever a legal argument comes up? Does it all really come down to the fact that the Constitution and Bill of Rights said "Person" instead of "Citizen"?

How far do these rights go? Can an Illegal Immigrant just claim that he wants "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" and we are infringing on his right? His right to peacefully assemble? His right to bear arms? His right against searches and seizure?

I'm waiting to see how far they take this and how they will manipulate the 'legal speak' to defend Illegals.




posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 06:55 PM
link   
The ACLU certainly has a valid argument in saying that state and local governments do not have the authority to control the federal borders and deal with illegal immigrant (the INS, among other departments, takes care of that). However, the lack of enforcement on the border and the inability to come up with a solution by the federal government has forced state officials into a corner where they have to act in order to protect their perceived economic interests.

In my view, the ACLU will probably not win this argument given the prevailing trend towards conservatism in America and the fact that while English as the official language provisions may not be the best approach to dealing with illegal immigrants, the voter and the citizen in America always look for strong leaders in spite of their politics. Legally, the ACLU case is stronger because the federal government should be taking care of this but courts are not insulated and their is a trend toward state activism on issues like illegal immigration.



new topics
 
0

log in

join