testtest

Undocumented Immigrant Due Process

Sharks79 said:
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
Click to expand...
That's true. It does not negate the fact that due process applies to everyone in the United States.
 
benstt said:
Sure, but lets not pretend the republican party circa 1868 is the same as now. Things changed mightily during the Johnson administration. As to rights guaranteed by the 14th, read it. Read the scholarship on it. Everyone in U.S. borders gets due process. To say otherwise is wrong, as are you.
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...
Click to expand...
Yes, I very much agree. To an extend, I think Obama's Dreamers covers that. Beyond that, I'd rather have an immigrant here who works and contributes than some entitled schmuck who thinks (s)he deserves something because they were born here.
 
Sharks79 said:
But the 14 does offer person due process, not just citizen.

As does 5th
Click to expand...
The 14th does not offer due process to non-citizens, as per the info I provided above.

Plus...The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that, with few discrete exceptions, people born in the United States are citizens of this country, irrespective of race, ethnicity, or national origin of their parents.

Frequently Asked Questions: Citizenship under 14th Amendment

What is the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment?The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that, with few discrete exceptions, people born in the United States are citizens of this country, irrespective of race, ethnicity, or national origin of their parents. The Amendment was...
www.acluaz.org www.acluaz.org

SCOTUS is studying how due process has been interpreted to date. Obama didn't think it did.
 
Last edited:
They need to start running the rock throwing protestors who are between 18 and 25 against the Selective Service Registry. It's a Felony with up to a 10 year sentence to not have registered. If people want to claim the they are "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" and so protected by the 14th Amendment, they should have shouldered their responsibilities under the other Federal Regulations.
 
Talyn said:
The 14th does not offer due process to non-citizens, as per the info I provided above.
Click to expand...
You are incorrect per the text of the 14th amendment

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.

The shift from citizen to person is very clear bud. It doesn’t say citizen, and punctuation 👍
 
Important considerations:
  • Border vs. Interior:
    The extent of due process rights can vary depending on whether the individual is at the border or within the U.S.

  • Expedited removal:
    At the border, individuals may face expedited removal procedures, which can limit the extent of the hearing.

  • Asylum seekers:
    Asylum seekers, even those at the border, must be given a credible fear interview and a hearing before an immigration judge if they express fear of persecution.
Known criminals differ than general illegal aliens just walking across or being actively imported into the country has the previous did when they flew them in en mass.

The Demos want all these illegals to get full jury trials with taxpayers-paid lawyers. Obama didn't give them that.
 
Last edited:
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...
It is called legal residency.
 
The Immigration and Nationality Act (1952), as amended, specifies that illegal aliens are only entitled to a hearing in front of an immigration judge, not a full-blown jury trial like what the left wants to drag the process out infinitim for millions of aliens that crossed the border violating US law.
 
My favorite talking point of the Left - there is no illegal voting by non-citizens, or that it’s always “right wingers” doing the illegal voting. What they (Leftists) like to leave out is that they (non-citizens) don’t have to vote. When there is a census, all those extra bodies that are non-citizens in those sanctuary cities count toward providing extra representation in the House of Representatives (based on population), which does, in fact, result in “non-citizens” having a vote.

Well, at least for those being honest about what the Left is attempting with their recurring open border policies. Now if immigration law was to change where only legal US citizens may be counted in US census’, then 1) open border policies would likely cease forever and 2) Democrats wouldn’t even care about illegal immigrants.
 
What part of “Illegal Alien” is confusing. You either belong here legally or you do not. Veteran are living on the streets while Illegals are being put up in hotels, given medical care and other monitory benefits. You constantly hear the libtards talking about “who will pick the fruit. Who will watch my children or cut my grass,” news flash, Americans will if you pay American wages. Is it not wrong to take advantage of someone by treating them badly by paying them sub-standard pay or poor working conditions.
 
Fred613 said:
What part of “Illegal Alien” is confusing. You either belong here legally or you do not. Veteran are living on the streets while Illegals are being put up in hotels, given medical care and other monitory benefits. You constantly hear the libtards talking about “who will pick the fruit. Who will watch my children or cut my grass,” news flash, Americans will if you pay American wages. Is it not wrong to take advantage of someone by treating them badly by paying them sub-standard pay or poor working conditions.
Click to expand...
That is what these people who are protecting them want, cheap slave labor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top