Posted on 04/20/2012 2:06:37 PM PDT by kevcol
--snip--
In almost total secrecy, the Obama Justice Department has charged a U.S. Border Patrol agent, Luis Fonseca, for depriving the rights of a yet to be identified illegal alien at the Border Patrol station located on Imperial Beach, California, last July. Fonseca, however, was not indicted until a week ago.
Agent Fonseca, 32, allegedly kneed and choked an unidentified alien during his tour near the Mexican border last summer. During his arraignment on Monday April 16, he entered a not guilty plea.
A grand jury had handed down the indictment on April 12, but details were withheld and the DOJ neglected to promulgate why the legal action was taken against the Border Patrol agent, according to an "Inside-the-Beltway" public-interest group that investigates and exposes government corruption and misconduct.
"Border Patrol Agent Fonseca kneed and choked an unidentified alien, depriving him of the right under the Constitution and the laws of the United States to be free from use of unreasonable force by a law enforcement officer," the U.S. Attorney's Office said in a statement.
According to Department of Justice’s records, a federal grand jury indicted Fonseca on a single charge of deprivation of rights under color of law. The charge, a civil rights violation, carries a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment.
rest of article: http://www.examiner.com/article/border-agent-indicted-for-violating-illegal-alien-s-rights#ixzz1scH59nfG
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
How can legislation be "unlawful" unless it violates the Constitution?
To quote Justice Scalia, "it is a truism that constitutional rights have costs."
To quote me, “The founders never intended the constitution to be a suicide pact.”
Perhaps I misspoke. Maybe it isn't unlawful.
Illegal aliens are person's of other countries unprotected by our constitution. Illegal aliens are criminals that have no allegiance to this country, therefore it makes no senses to give them constitutional rights so they can shit all over us and destroy our nation.
Perhaps you could explain why it is you like the idea of illegal aliens having Constitutional rights.
Because I believe in the Constitution and I believe it should be enforced as written.
The Framers of the Constitution knew how to use the word "citizen" when they intended to talk about citizens. E.g., Article I, section 2 (a member of the House of Representatives must have "been seven Years a Citizen of the United States.") They also knew how to use broader words when they wished to include people who weren't citizens. E.g., the Fifth Amendment ("nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law") or the Sixth Amendment ("In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...").
If the Fifth and Sixth Amendment only apply to citizens, why did they use the words "any person" or "the accused" and not "any citizen" or "the accused citizen"? Why did the Sixth Amendment talk about "all criminal prosecutions" if, according to you, it only means "some criminal prosecutions" (the ones where the defendant is a citizen)?
I thought it was liberals who pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they want to enforce. For my part, I'd like to see all of it enforced the way the Framers wrote it.
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.