testtest

Undocumented Immigrant Due Process

getthefuout.png
 
All the hand wringing about the deportations of gang members makes me think of the mothers and grandmothers in my area who almost always talk about how innocent and what a “good boy” their son/grandson was when an innocent victim dispatches a thug trying to rob or kill them. We are letting an appointed judge over rule the LEO’s who have done their due diligence in searching out gang members who are intent on doing harm to American citizens. Those LEO’s are putting their lives on the line to protect us ( refer to Hayes’ thread “Officer Down”). Lots of politics here, but let’s not ignore the work our federal, state and local LEO”s are doing.
 
I hate that we use the words Immigrant or Immigration relating to this at all... I dont think I know anyone that is anti immigrant or anti immigration, those words should not be lumped in with a legal status or criminal rights argument. I have many friends who came to this country legally, thus they immigrated. If I jump over your fence or come in your backdoor without permission, I am not an undocumented guest at your house, I am a criminal. Yes the legal immigration process needs fixing, but that does not validate crime.
 
Model 457 said:
I'm not a conservative nor am I a liberal. I poke fun whenever / wherever I see an opportunity. That being said, if I've offended anyone, I hereby sentence you to watch a ten hour Dave Chappelle marathon. If it doesn't loosen you up, maybe it'll kill ya!
Click to expand...
That’s where i sit…I’ll call BS no matter what side of the fence it’s thrown 😂

I do agree what you’re talking about (never heard of that rule) is crap because that’s an assumption of guilt without burden of proof. no beuno
 
I am an immigrant. I followed due process, paid thousands of dollars and travelled wherever "they" sent me for medical exams, interviews, etc. The US government knows more about me than I do. I realize that many people flee war and poverty looking for safety and acceptance. There is a process for that. When the floodgates at our border were left open...they came, along with some of the most despicable excuses for human beings sent by some of the most vicious gangs in the world.

Now, I do believe that refugees deserve to be heard. I do not believe that the bottom feeders deserve due process. Call me what you will, I don't care. I feel that the crap that has been going on with illegal CRIMINALS is a huge slap in the face of every single immigrant who has knocked him/herself out to do it the right way. They had no respect for due process, so they deserve exactly that.

My .02.
 
benstt said:
Well, the 14th was ratified close to 100 years after our founding and largely in response to a civil war brought on, in large part, because a significant portion of our country didn't see people (brown people, then as now) within our borders as people. That fact is becoming more relevant now by the day. legally, they get due process. Morally, don't hurt the people who can't fight back. Religiously (I can only speak from the Christian side) we are called and COMMANDED to treat the foreigner with kindness and not mistreat them, and whatever we do to the least of us we do to Christ himself. People who make claims about loving the Constitution, loving the law, or being Christian would do well to remember all those things. Remember and embrace the principles of our law and our faith or stop with all the pretenses and own the fact that you know what you've been called to and what the law says, but you just don't care and won't do those things.
Click to expand...
Yea but the 5th amendment uses the verbiage person as well and that was ratified well before the 14th.

And it’s also used in the original articles as well
 
Talyn said:
POTUS Obama deported +2.5 million illegal aliens without due process because they entered the country illegally, and no one questioned him.

In fact, some groups called him the deporter in chief.

View attachment 86342

abcnews.go.com

Obama Has Deported More People Than Any Other President

Trump may be getting closer to Obama's recent policy.
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com

View attachment 86341
View attachment 86343


View attachment 86344
Click to expand...
definitely remember this and a lot of people were not thrilled so to say nobody complained is a bit false. Agree wasn’t as media-sized, but i remember ACLU and the like blasting him
 
The 14th (Republican-led) was the last nail in the coffin of the "Democrat" Dred Scott Decision. It had nothing to do with illegal aliens.

The 14th offers no due process to non-citizens. That's why Obama deported so many without due process.

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution effectively overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, regardless of race. This directly contradicted the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling of 1857, which had declared that people of African descent, whether enslaved or free, were not and could never be citizens of the United States.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
  • Dred Scott Decision:
    In 1857, the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott v. Sandford that people of African descent were not and could not be citizens of the United States. The court also stated that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories.

    • 14th Amendment:
      Ratified in 1868, the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause declared that "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". This clause explicitly overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all persons born in the United States, including those of African descent.
    • Overturning Dred Scott:
      The 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause directly refuted the core holding of the Dred Scott decision, ensuring that people of African descent were recognized as citizens. This paved the way for greater equality and civil rights for African Americans.
    • Other Provisions of the 14th Amendment:
      The 14th Amendment also includes the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause, which further protect the rights of all citizens against state action. While the Citizenship Clause directly addressed the Dred Scott decision, these other clauses have also played a crucial role in expanding and protecting civil rights in the United States, according to the National Constitution Center.
www.pbs.org

Dred Scott v. Sandford | Equality | CONSTITUTION USA with Peter Sagal | PBS

Learn how the Dred Scott decision provoked a war instead of stopping one.
www.pbs.org www.pbs.org

www.monticello.org

14th Amendment

An article discussing the 14th Amendment extending full U.S. citizenship to those formerly enslaved and the expansion of its provisions to include other minorities.
www.monticello.org www.monticello.org
 
This whole discussion is waaay over my head.

The only input I really have is if the person is claiming they are a citizen they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Similarly, if the person has requested Asylum or is going through the citizenship process they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Last example, Several years ago there was a young lady (21ish YO) in Colorado Springs who accidentally killed one of her children.

The fact that it was an accident was never in question but during the process it came out that her parents had brought her to America illegally when she was 2YO.

She grew up here, she had no idea she wasn't a citizen. She was educated entirely in the United States. She had married a Marine and had a kid. She had paid taxes in America and even voted in our elections.

They wanted her to take a plea deal but if she did she was going to be deported to a country she had no memory of and knew no one in and didn't even speak the language.

There needs to be a category for people like that who are here illegally with no criminal intent and through no fault of their own.
 
The Night Rider said:
This whole discussion is waaay over my head.

The only input I really have is if the person is claiming they are a citizen they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Similarly, if the person has requested Asylum or is going through the citizenship process they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Last example, Several years ago there was a young lady (21ish YO) in Colorado Springs who accidentally killed one of her children.

The fact that it was an accident was never in question but during the process it came out that her parents had brought her to America illegally when she was 2YO.

She grew up here, she had no idea she wasn't a citizen. She was educated entirely in the United States. She had married a Marine and had a kid. She had paid taxes in America and even voted in our elections.

They wanted her to take a plea deal but if she did she was going to be deported to a country she had no memory of and knew no one in and didn't even speak the language.

There needs to be a category for people like that who are here illegally with no criminal intent and through no fault of their own.
Click to expand...
I was born in Canada, raised in upstate NY. My mom came down to the US from Canada in the 1957. I lived in the US illegally until I was 16 years old. I didn't even know I wasn't a US citizen until my parents told me when I was 15. Talk about a mind ****. I was finally able to do it right decades later. Anyway, borders were more porous back then. I truly feel for this woman. I agree with you 100 %.
 
The Night Rider said:
This whole discussion is waaay over my head.

The only input I really have is if the person is claiming they are a citizen they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Similarly, if the person has requested Asylum or is going through the citizenship process they should have a reasonable amount of time to prove it.

Last example, Several years ago there was a young lady (21ish YO) in Colorado Springs who accidentally killed one of her children.

The fact that it was an accident was never in question but during the process it came out that her parents had brought her to America illegally when she was 2YO.

She grew up here, she had no idea she wasn't a citizen. She was educated entirely in the United States. She had married a Marine and had a kid. She had paid taxes in America and even voted in our elections.

They wanted her to take a plea deal but if she did she was going to be deported to a country she had no memory of and knew no one in and didn't even speak the language.

There needs to be a category for people like that who are here illegally with no criminal intent and through no fault of their own.
Click to expand...
You are wise
 
Talyn said:
The 14th (Republican-led) was the last nail in the coffin of the "Democrat" Dred Scott Decision. It had nothing to do with illegal aliens.

The 14th offers no due process to non-citizens. That's why Obama deported so many without due process.

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution effectively overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, regardless of race. This directly contradicted the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling of 1857, which had declared that people of African descent, whether enslaved or free, were not and could never be citizens of the United States.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
  • Dred Scott Decision:
    In 1857, the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott v. Sandford that people of African descent were not and could not be citizens of the United States. The court also stated that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories.

    • 14th Amendment:
      Ratified in 1868, the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause declared that "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". This clause explicitly overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all persons born in the United States, including those of African descent.
    • Overturning Dred Scott:
      The 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause directly refuted the core holding of the Dred Scott decision, ensuring that people of African descent were recognized as citizens. This paved the way for greater equality and civil rights for African Americans.
    • Other Provisions of the 14th Amendment:
      The 14th Amendment also includes the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause, which further protect the rights of all citizens against state action. While the Citizenship Clause directly addressed the Dred Scott decision, these other clauses have also played a crucial role in expanding and protecting civil rights in the United States, according to the National Constitution Center.
www.pbs.org

Dred Scott v. Sandford | Equality | CONSTITUTION USA with Peter Sagal | PBS

Learn how the Dred Scott decision provoked a war instead of stopping one.
www.pbs.org www.pbs.org

www.monticello.org

14th Amendment

An article discussing the 14th Amendment extending full U.S. citizenship to those formerly enslaved and the expansion of its provisions to include other minorities.
www.monticello.org www.monticello.org
Click to expand...
Amendment calls out persons born naturalized as citizens, and no law abridging privileges of citizens then reverts back to person with respect to LLP. Likely because of the 5th amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top