For years now I have been saying that the term "unconstitutional" has been redefined to mean "opposes the leftwing agenda". Now lefties are asserting the Supreme Court's "right" to strike down portions of the Constitution itself as being "unconstitutional," thus vindicating my prediction in a most unwantedly resounding fashion.
Evidently wanting to prove that this fancifully tyrannical phenomenon is a feature and not a bug, Lyle Denniston - and I swear to God I'm not making the rest of this up - “constitutional literacy adviser” for the National Constitution Center - takes that crazy baton today and runs to the far reaches of madness from anything the founding fathers ever imagined:
Foreign nationals who enter the U.S. illegally and then remain do not have fully protected rights under the Constitution.
Actually, they don't have ANY rights under the Constitution because they're NOT CITIZENS.
They cannot vote, for example.
They can now, Lyle. They already are. And why shouldn't they be able to by your logic? Isn't denying them the ballot (which they're not) "racist" and "discriminatory"?
But it has been true since at least 1886 that the Fourteenth Amendment has been interpreted as assuring them at least a significant measure of constitutional equality and fair treatment.
So we've been getting it wrong for 129 years. The longevity of that error doesn't make it correct.
The government simply does not have the constitutional power to do whatever it wishes with non-citizens, based solely on their illegal presence inside the country.
Actually, yes, it does, Lyle. Which raises the question of what you fear "the government" might do with them.
There is, of course, a basic constitutional understanding that a sovereign nation has broad power to protect its borders, to decide who may enter its territory, what foreign nationals who enter can do while inside its borders, and how long they may be allowed to stay.
Apparently not, Lyle. You've just contradicted everything you said before this sentence and everything you say after it. Either our country is a sovereign nation or it is not. The Constitution as originally understood says it is; you say elsewhere that it is not. Which is it?
Congress basically decides most of those issues by passing laws, but the Executive Branch has very wide discretion to decide the particulars of enforcing those laws.
IOW, Obamnesty. Which is unconstitutional under Article I, Section 1. Something that somebody who is "constitutionally literate" ought to understand.
Neither branch, however, may simply sweep away “life, liberty or property” from [illegal alien]s, just because they lack the proper papers. And neither may the State governments where such [alien]s live.
The first - life - is a strawman. Nobody - not even Donald Trump if he meant a word of what's he's trying to put over on the subject - is proposing that illegals be liquidated, wholesale or otherwise. Those, like Francisco Sanchez, who commit capital murder can be subject to execution (and damned well should be put to death), but then that applies to any citizen as well, yes?
The liberty of any citizen is subject to curtailment if they break the law, and illegal aliens have broken U.S. immigration laws by definition. Claiming that they should get a pass that citizens would never receive hardly qualifies as "equal protection," Lyle. And does not, in point of fact, deportation restore their liberty? Just on the other side of the border they're not legally entitled to cross? Better to be free on one's own recognizance in Mexico (or parts further south, but that's not our problem) than locked up here, right? And is it really such an onerous crutch to require aspiring immigrants to go through the legal process of coming here? You'd think that people who truly wanted to become Americans would accept that without a second thought. Shouldn't that desire be a prerequisite, Lyle?
As for property, if it's portable, and they didn't steal it, they can take it with them back south. Sound like a plan?
Once again, the key phrase of Amendment XIV, Section 1 is "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Illegal aliens and their children are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because as foreign nationals, their loyalty is to another government, and therefore they and their children by definition are not citizens of the United States and are, under Article IV, Section 4, subject to summary deportation. It's as simple as that.
Boy, never has a true originalist constitutional think tank been more desperately needed. huh? I wonder where such an entity could scare up a director and a "constitutional literacy adviser" sidekick. Hmmm....
No comments:
Post a Comment