For the purposes of this thread and the topic and hand, which is who "the people" mentioned in the 2nd Amend. are, foreign, non-US citizens are irrelevant. The cut you presented from Taney's opinion is irrelevant, because were talking about "the people" specifically, who Taney clearly says are citizens of the US and clearly does not mean "the States". Taney calls US citizens, "the people" of the various States. The term "Persons" is irrelevant here.
"Noncitizens have always benefitted from the safeguards of the Fourth Amendment. See Au Yi Lau v. INS, 445 F.2d 217 (1971); Illinois Migrant Council v. Pilliod, 540 F.2d 1062 (1976)."
Irrelevant. I gave examples with my statement, that qualified it. Also, that cut from the case you presented isirrelevant to both the Patriot Act(4th Amend) and the prohibitions on foreign campaign activity(1st Amend).
For the third and last time, Taney says, "... who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union ...". Not "who were recognized as US citizens" or "who were recognized as persons" or "who were recognized as 'the people'".
I'm done. I've asked you twice to read his statement and you refused. Remain ignorant for all I care.