[trumandogz]

So presumably if the army of a foreign invader were on our soil, you’d argue we couldn’t do anything about it, due to the Second Amendment?

Presumably, if the U.S. were invaded by Mexico, Canada or some other country, the Constitution would be suspended thus denying the foreign invaders of Constitutional protections.

[FreedomPoster]

Right. Got it. That’s an argument only an ACLU lawyer could love. And see my previous post, just above.

[Travis McGee]

Presumably, if the U.S. were invaded by Mexico, Canada or some other country, the Constitution would be suspended thus denying the foreign invaders of Constitutional protections.

If? If?

What, do you need to literally see foreign TANKS before you can recognize and invasion?

U.S. Constitution, Article 4 Section 4:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,

and shall protect each of them against Invasion;"

---

Invasion: \In*va"sion\, n. [L. invasio: cf. F. invasion. See Invade.] [1913 Webster]

1. The act of invading; the act of encroaching upon the rights or possessions of another; encroachment; trespass.

[ReignOfError]

Presumably, if the U.S. were invaded by Mexico, Canada or some other country, the Constitution would be suspended thus denying the foreign invaders of Constitutional protections.

Sheer and utter nonsense. The Constitution has never been suspended in toto, though some provisions have been pushed to the breaking point, in time of war. The 1812 and 1864 elections went ahead on schedule.

The simple answer is that Constitutional rights are irrelevant to soldiers in an invading army. Corpses have no rights, and prisoners few, and the only way an enemy soldier falls under the power of US law is in one of those two states. In the latter case, prisoners of war, the Geneva Convention is binding. Duly-ratified treaties are US law -- that's in the Constitution.