Posted on 05/11/2016 1:01:48 PM PDT by Mechanicos
11 Dec 2015 Thursday night on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s proposed ban Muslim for entering the Untied States would violate the First Amendment of the Constitution.
Giuliani said, “I think we have to be very careful about who we let in. I don’t think we should let any of the refugees in. I think they should be put in a safe zone in Syria, but if you do a ban on all Muslims, I have no question that you violate the first amendment. The reality is if you let no one in, you could say well, they have no Constitutional rights but once the government sets up a system, the government cannot discriminate in the way it applies that system. So the minute the government sets up an immigration system it can’t use religion as a test or race or gender as a basis for why someone can’t come in.”
He continued, “We have to tell people things that are realistic. Thousands and thousands of Egyptian people from Dubai, people from the Arab Emirates, we do business with them. We own businesses there, they own businesses here. We trade oil, natural gas.”
He added: "We don’t have a right to ban all Muslims…How do you stop a businessman who’s been coming back and forth to conduct his business every month. You cannot establish a ban on all Muslims, And also if you did that, you would really take that population and start radicalizing a lot more of them if you did it. To me, it’s not a sensible proposal.”
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/12/11/giuliani-no-question-trump-muslim-violates-first-amendment/
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
This “explains” the 1st Amendment connection...
I’m perpetually appalled at the way limousine liberals and other left-wing lunatics grant every freedom under the U.S. Constitution to everyone around the world EXCEPT actual U.S. citizens.
Giuliani can go pound sand.
>>He added: “We don’t have a right to ban all Muslims…How do you stop a businessman who’s been coming back and forth to conduct his business every month. You cannot establish a ban on all Muslims, And also if you did that, you would really take that population and start radicalizing a lot more of them if you did it. To me, it’s not a sensible proposal.”
And this guy is supposed to be a clear-thinking person? Remember, he’s Julie-Annie, the LIB.
Yes, he cleaned up NYC, no one is all good or all bad, but this kind of thinking is just unAmerican, stupid, and dangerous.
If our leaders won’t do what’s necessary to establish basic safety, COMMON SENSE, then God help us.
We not only have a “right” to ban all muslims, we have a DUTY to do so.
Under the Constitution, the law could ban Christian immigration, White immigration, female immigration, immigration of clothed people.
People need to stop imposing on our tiny Constitution!
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Wearing stripes and checks together violates the twelveth amendment
exactly!
bingo!
Lotsa folks want to ban talk these days.
Where,; in the Constitution; do we find this?
Whose court?
Meanwhile; the ones already here breed like rabbits; grow up following Muslim religion; go to Muslim schools...
tada!
How does it do that?
Just fix it Donald.
ASAP?
I was under the impression Presidents get 100 days...
http://www.usnews.com/news/history/articles/2009/02/12/the-first-100-days-franklin-roosevelt-pioneered-the-100-day-concept
The petty Establishment makes hay out of the tiniest mistakes that Trump makes. This is one easy one to correct. All he need do is say he meant immigrants and not short term visitors. Two totally different types of visas.
One of the biggest problems facing our society is that people have been taught to actually believe that discrimination is wrong. Meanwhile, discrimination is what our government, corporations, and everyone in their daily lives must do, constantly. The question, really, is who will be favored and who will be discriminated against.
Giuliani apparently overlooks the fact that for many decades now, since 1965, our imnigration policy DOES discriminate against whites, in favor of third world swarms. Not to mention that there’s ample precedent for banning entire categories of people from coming here based on religion, ideology, race, nationality, you name it. STFU Rudy, you lost my favor.
Guiliani is wrong about this. Plus there is a big difference between a businessman coming and going and a a bunch of ragtag Somoli’s being brought in to work cheap in the meat packing plants.
That which is not included is therefore excluded. The Rule of Exclusion is what creates the limits in the Constitution.
§ 207. XIII. Another rule of interpretation deserves consideration in regard to the constitution. There are certain maxims, which have found their way, not only into judicial discussions, but into the business of common life, as founded in common sense, and common convenience. Thus, it is often said, that in an instrument a specification of particulars is an exclusion of generals; or the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Lord Bacon's remark, "that, as exception strengthens the force of a law in cases not excepted, so enumeration weakens it in cases not enumerated," has been perpetually referred to, as a fine illustration.
Justice Joseph Story on Rules of Constitutional Interpretation
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.