Posted on 04/20/2025 2:25:33 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
+1
Thoughtfully said.
No. Else why does it also say “We the People of the United States”, if it applies to all men?
It is true that basic human rights were instituted by the Creator, not by any government - but our laws do not automatically grant exactly the same rights of citizens to a green card holder - if indeed this man was such because that assertion is in doubt.
> They do not grant rights.
Aliens have no right to vote in our elections - never have. There exist some rights and responsibilities that United States citizens have, that others simply do not have. Recognizing that Nature’s God has given men rights does not automatically mean that the United States constitution applies to every man.
> all persons in the U.S. do have Constitutional rights
You must not be familiar with the mores and customs of English common law, and American jurisprudence.
What is the historical context of the Constitution, the foundational law of the land?
“Article. XV. Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
Only citizens have the right to vote. The laws for citizens and aliens are not universally identical. They never have been.
Another example: “Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”
But aliens did not and still do not have that right.
Recall that historically, we should consider the Bill of Rights as a combination of State rights and individual guarantees against certain acts by the federal government. One of the greatest freedoms to come out of the great compact between individual States in forming a new Union we call the United States was the right to self-government without federal interference during peace. The Bill of Rights acted to protect the States and its citizens from oppressive acts by Congress in abridging such things as speech, the press or imprisonment without trial.
An American citizen has an enumerated right to be protected from acts of Congress abridging their speech, religion or the press but also have a enumerated right to regulate speech, the press or even create a State church via their State legislative process through the Tenth Amendment.
Aliens simply do not - even if we traditionally have graciously given them many provisions, that does not mean they automatically have such a right because the Constitution is silent on that matter - meaning it confers no such law.
In February of 1866 John A. Bingham, a Republican representative from Ohio, proposed amending the Constitution of the United States with the following proposed amendment:
The Congress shall have power to make laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure to the citizens of each State all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and to all persons in the several States equal protection in the rights of life, liberty, and property.
Initially this amendment ran into strong opposition from all sides of the aisle, leading to Sen. William Stewart of Nevada to argue the amendment would permit “Congress to legislate fully upon all subjects affecting life, liberty, and property,” to such degree that “there would not be much left for the State Legislatures,” and would thereby “work an entire change in our form of government.”
Citizens have these rights, but a green card holder is not a citizen of any USA state.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
Aliens are neither “born or naturalized in the United States” - even if they hold a green card.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
Sen. Howard introduced the clause this way:
[T]his amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
Of course the only other class of persons left that can be considered is US Citizens. Note that Sen. Howard considered it “the law of the land” already, confirming that it was already established national law that it was not enough to simply be born within the US to become a United States citizen. Sen. Howard later confirms just this when he said the Citizenship Clause “ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.”
Essentially then, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” was not used in any sense of geographical location — but in the full sense of allegiance. This is confirmed by Sen. James Kelly a few years later when he said “in order to be a citizen of the United States he must been not only be born within the United States, but born within the allegiance of the United States.”
+1
+1
Especially considering that our inalienable rights come from Nature’s God, and considering the context of English Natural Law.
Acts 4
19 But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.
+1
> visa
Where a visa is granted, it can also be revoked. Just because someone managed to violate one law does not suddenly confer upon them all the rights granted to citizens of the country who are subject to the jurisdiction thereof - and keep the laws.
+1
Non-sequitur. Roman citizens were also taxed - yet they were clearly not slaves.
I do like your tag line! :-)
Supreme Court decisions change.
The constitution never actually gives those provisions to any but citizens.
Not an illegal one, only those who have gone through the vetting process and hold a valid visa.
Exactly. Citizenship either means something or it is worthless. Why did the Revolutionaries fight the war of independence? Not just so they could be equal to British subjects in the land!
Voting is not a right. It is a privilege of the citizen.
(Apparently some people claim he indeed had a green card and that there was misidentification that led to him wrongfully being deported...? Or some such thing...I’ve only heard it 3rd-hand.)
Keeping the visa is contingent upon compliance with our laws. Until the Democrats intervened.
+1
If an immigration judge rules that anyone is likely to have committed serious criminal acts and/or are part of a terrorist group or are part of an invasion, that really ought to do the trick - out they should go. That’s the extent of due process they are due if they are not citizens.
> I did have every right in the Constitution prior to
> attaining citizenship
To the best of my knowledge you did not have the right to a trial by jury - only by a judge. You did not have the right to vote.
+1
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.