Should the constitution (specifically Amend. VI) only apply to US citizens?

Most people seem to think so, but why?

I had the opinion that it should, but when asked for my logic, I struggled to come up with a response.


So, should the rights in the constitution only apply to US citizens?


And move this post if needed. I wasn't sure where it should go.

I will try and argue that it should not only apply to American citizens, although my belief either way is still very shaky. To be honest, I am not sure which side I agree with.



[edit on 9-7-2004 by Cutwolf]

Since so few responses, I guess I will start:


When I originally started thinking about why I thought the constitution should only apply to US citizens, I thought, "Well, foreigners don't contribute to America. Our constitution is by the people and for the people of America, no one else."


Then I thought some more. What defines a contribution? If Osama bin Laden buys a $1.99 Big Mac he has contributed something, albeit small, to our country. If a foreigner works and helps build a product and that product is shipped to America, he has contributed something to our country. The majority in the world can probably say they've contributed to America in some way, no matter how big or small.

And if America's goal is to spread peace, love, freedom, justice, and equality all around the world, wouldn't it make sense that all of its prisoners receive the same treatment that our consitution guarantees citizens? I understand someone may have done something horrible, but that is not up to the government to decide.

If America truly attempting to spread equality, justice, and freedom around the globe then every prisoner of America deserves the same equality, justice, and freedom as guaranteed by the constitution. Anything less would completely go against the ideals America is working so hard to instill into the world; anything less would be hypocritical.

[edit on 9-7-2004 by Cutwolf]

I want to say that you are right and I want to agree but I need to put some thought into this one because every action has a reaction. Is your point the manipulation of our laws by non citizens at the cost of our freedom.

The Constitution was designed for the citizens, by citizens, and surely without regard to any other nationalities.

It was never meant for anyone other than US citizens.

Now if other countries want to adopt similar texts,...

If Americans are involved in a position of power over another the constitution should apply.

It shouldn't be oh, you are a Canadian in an American jail, you are not American thus not eligable for OUR rights, and you are not in Canada thus not eligable for YOUR (Canadian) rights. That is unjust and unfair. Making someone less then a person.

It should be you are a Canadian in our jail, subject to all of our rules, all of our rights, etc.

Just as an American should be subject to the rules and rights of the nation they are a captive of. An American in a Canadian is subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.

Article [VI.]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

It is for 'the accused', which to me would ALL people, because it does not say 'the accused citizen'. It seems to me the US Constitution, as well as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms makes the distinction between Every Citizen, and All People.

laws.justice.gc.ca...
www.house.gov...
www.house.gov...

The constitution applies to anyone on American soil. Thus, if they committed a crime on American soil, they are sunject to our laws, rules, and regulations. No matter where they come from.

remeber, there are a bunch of foreigners in our country right now living here. Since they are living and working here, they should have every right and responsibility applied to them, wwith the exception of voting and running for office, if they are not citizens.

Now when in another country, it is different, local laws and customs must be followed in individual countires. So are non citizens overseas subject to the rights of the US constitution? No, thats where international law or local law applies.

Basically, my belief is the constitution applies to to anyone on US soil, citzen or not, with a few exceptions. So yes, it applies.

Youre obviously talking about the problems with the folks at Camp X-ray and the fact they are trying to deny them legal counsel and the right to a speedy trial. My answer is, even though they are not on US soil, technically, they are being held by Americans, thus, yes, since they are being kept by us, they should be sunjected to the same laws the rest of us, including the right to a public defender.

The Constitution was designed for the citizens, by citizens, and surely without regard to any other nationalities.

It was never meant for anyone other than US citizens.

Now if other countries want to adopt similar texts,...

Really? So Americans are the only ones who should be allowed to have the rights in our constitution? If there is a country that puts any accused criminal instantly to death, is that what the US should do?

Whatever happened to wanting to spread freedom and justice all around the globe?

If you say our bill of rights only applies to Americans you are thereby saying everyone else is inferior and does not deserve the rights we have.

I thought the rights in our constitution were rights that everyone has and the constitution is not actually giving the rights to us, but simply preventing the government from infringing upon those rights?



[edit on 9-7-2004 by Cutwolf]

The Constitution is about universally applicable principles, but when tyranny ariises, you put these things into distinctions.

Our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, illustrates this quite well.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"

So don't use the Constitution to deny people rights "endowed by their Creator."

I rest my case


P.S. "So (you understood) don't use the Constitution to deny people rights "endowed by their Creator," means "you in general," not necessarily "you," in particular.

Thanks

[edit on 9-7-2004 by SkipShipman]

So don't use the Constitution to deny people rights "endowed by their Creator."

Was that directed at me? If so, you must have completely misunderstood my post.