[middie]

It's an easy concept that is firmly entrenched in constitutional law. Any detriment (ie:law or regulation enforcement) or any benefit to which other persons similarly situated are entitled cannot lawfully restricted or denied to any person within our territorial jurisdiction on the basis of race, religion, creed, citizenship or country of origin. It comes down to this: if a person - irrespective of citizenship - seeks to avail himself of a benefit otherwise available to other persons, that benefit cannot be conditioned on citizenship or status of an alien. That's the basic constitutional doctrine of equal protection of the laws.

Just as every person within our jurisdiction (ie: subject to our civil and criminal laws) must pay taxes on inccome or property, comply with our criminal laws, can sue or be sued in our courts, can be subpoened or compelled to attend court or appear before a law enforcement agency or grand jury or any other aspect of participation in daily life, then that same person is entitled to whatever any other person would.

We can agree, disagree, like it or not, but our Constitution does not allow it to be any other way.

[EDINVA]

could you give me some case citations?

Under your scenario, anyone who happens to be physically in the US on election day could just walk in and vote ... I think your interpretation is way too liberal. I believe the protections clause has to do with due process, not entitlements, but do look forward to your citing those cases.