Posted on 06/03/2016 10:56:00 AM PDT by McGruff
This idiot Cole probably thinks the inscription on the Statue of Liberty is US immigration law.
Right! ...anymore than who we let into our house!
The current U.S. Immigration Law does not allow for religious discrimination.
However, these refugees are coming from an area where Muslims are killing Muslims.
However, current U.S. Immigration Law does allow for background security investigations for the purpose of excluding combatants,
despite the current attitude of the current administration .
Where there is insufficient security and background information, the nation is perfectly within its rights to deny acceptance of any immigrant/ refugee
until a satisfactory investigation has been conducted.
An unvetted refugee is no less dangerous than an unvetted _resident.
The US Constitution was never meant to be a suicide pact.
Send it to the dork so he can be enlightened.
I present to you Congresscreep..Chester A Arthur.
No, it is not. There is no requirement in our constitution to allow the enemy entrance into the US. You only have to read the koran and surahs to know islam is nothing but an enemy that does not allow our constitution to survive.
Note to Okie from Oklahoma...read the friggen Immigration act of 1952...sometimes called the McCarren act...it has been law since before Eisenhower became President ...we are looking at 64 years here...so it’s almost old enough to qualify for medicare...
READ THE DAMN LAW ...thats what you are paid to do as a US Senator...
and re think that oath
you can always resign for reason of incompetency!
Freegards
LEX
Corportists like Cole do not want to fight the progressives. Too much money to be made and hookers to party with.
President Roosevelt, the patron saint of the Democrats and the Left, rounded up all the West Coast Japanese and put them in internment camps. Was that Constitutional? Where is the crazy dance about that?
Why tempt fate. What happens if something happens and we have to round up all the Muslims in the country and put them in internment camps? Never happen? If one nuke took out a city, like New York, there will be round ups, I guarantee.
People who are not US citizens are not protected by the US Constitution. A US congress person should at a bare minimum understand the Constitution.
Under his logic, everyone on the planet is covered by the US Constitution.
The issue has nothing to do with the Constitution. As a Congressman who has sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution, he should know what it does and does not cover.
Most Congress critters are trained lawyers. They should know what’s in the Constitution. They just don’t care.
A little background research shows pretty much what you’d expect.
We need to close the borders to anyone who does not go through the visa process.
Oh, there’s gonna be a muzlum ban. And they’re gonna pay for it. Get your money ready doofuses.
Move the muzzies to Cole’s district in Oklahoma.
Sure, our friends, the good Muslims, will save us from the bad Muslims — so long as we keep on their good side, talk nice to them, and treat Islam as special. With such reasoning our elites have made us hostage to Muslim terrorism and mandate Islamization as the price of survival.
Note that the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court have indicated that constitutional rights are associated with citizenship.
14th Amendment, Section 1: 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 [emphasis added]; 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.
“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphases added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
Another worthless side-buster talking out of the side of his neck.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.