Trump and his supporters clearly believe migrants have no constitutional rights. But that’s simply not true. They have the same rights as citizens for one truly obvious reason: a government c…
No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
-5th Amendment
It doesn’t say no citizen. It says no person. So, if Due Process doesn’t apply to them, are they no longer people? Isn’t this basically one of the steps that led into the holocaust? They stripped the Jews of their citizenship, deprived them of personhood, then exterminated them.
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.
it seems if they had to state it twice it was both a problem and important. fuck that it’s a problem again. Also to echo your sentiment, person not citizen.
And there it goes. Enough people have no issues whatsoever involving their morals or borrowing a rapist/felons morality and making a case in their head where they are right and the Constitution is wrong. You can go and talk to 100 people and enough are afraid of the bogeyman to cave on constitutional rights.
That clause is basically what incorporates the bill of rights to apply against the states. Before that Amendment, the BoR just applied against the federal government. To this day there hasn’t been official recognition by the judiciary to apply the some of the BoR against the states (3rd Amendment, the dollar requirement from the 7th, and the like).
And that is very much intentional. Due process cannot be denied to anyone or else it effectively applies to no one because they can just identify you as someone who it does not apply to and without due process you cannot prove otherwise.
-5th Amendment
It doesn’t say no citizen. It says no person. So, if Due Process doesn’t apply to them, are they no longer people? Isn’t this basically one of the steps that led into the holocaust? They stripped the Jews of their citizenship, deprived them of personhood, then exterminated them.
it seems if they had to state it twice it was both a problem and important. fuck that it’s a problem again. Also to echo your sentiment, person not citizen.
“But if they are a criminal…”
And there it goes. Enough people have no issues whatsoever involving their morals or borrowing a rapist/felons morality and making a case in their head where they are right and the Constitution is wrong. You can go and talk to 100 people and enough are afraid of the bogeyman to cave on constitutional rights.
That clause is basically what incorporates the bill of rights to apply against the states. Before that Amendment, the BoR just applied against the federal government. To this day there hasn’t been official recognition by the judiciary to apply the some of the BoR against the states (3rd Amendment, the dollar requirement from the 7th, and the like).
And that is very much intentional. Due process cannot be denied to anyone or else it effectively applies to no one because they can just identify you as someone who it does not apply to and without due process you cannot prove otherwise.