Unless I have completely misread the Untied States Constitution , one must be a legal citzen of our country to be protected and covered by our Constitution and legal laws. The only rights illegal aliens are entitled to are those offered by the U.S. Immigration and Customs enforcement agency.
2007-03-01 05:44:00 · 7 answers · asked by Zoe 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Ummmmmmmmm Key Word Legal
2007-03-01 06:04:43 · update #1
"one must be a legal citzen of our country to be protected and covered by our Constitution and legal laws" No you did not misread anything...........
And Michael E--since the preceeding paragraphs are referring to CITIZENS "persons" in the amendment are referring to persons WHO ARE CITIZENS.
2007-03-02 02:06:17 · answer #1 · answered by Cherie 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is perverted interpretatitions of the 14th amendment and legislating from the bench which allows it.
As Michael E pointed out:
Section 1. 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.
What is not pointed out which everyone either ignores or is just plain ignorant of is the significance of the words
"and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"
During Reconstruction, Senator Jacob Howard participated in debate over the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, arguing for including the phrase and subject to the jurisdiction thereof specifically because he wanted to make clear that the simple accident of birth in the United States was not sufficient to justify citizenship. Howard said:
[The 14th amendment] 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 very other class of person. Despite his intention the amendment has since been interpreted to guarantee citizenship to every person born in the United States.
His express and written intent was to DENY birthright citizenship to "foreigners" and "Aliens". The Supreme Court has NEVER ruled on the issue and how could they? Could the Supreme Beings somehow justify saying "Oh he really didn't mean that"
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "
The interpretations of this passage really gets perverted. Equal protection of laws is NOT the same as rights and privileges afforded to citizens. As a matter of fact, citizens are being DENIED equal protection under the law. The law should be protecting us from the illegal invaders and it is not. Equal protection implies equal ENFORCEMENT and american citizens are being denied that in favor of government sanctioned look the other way policies.
There you have it. The 14th amendment gets interpreted the way the liberal elite wants to interpret it and no ne challanges it and the ACLU remains silent because current interpretations are in line with their agenda.
2007-03-01 16:12:54 · answer #2 · answered by hockey g 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its not about increasing the rights of illegals.its about restricting the rights of Americans.for 200 years Americans have been able to express approval,(or disapproval) of the direction of the country.political careers have been made or ruined by the actions of the person.in the last 30 to 40 years.political leaders can not gain approval on policy endorsement,thus deals are made for endorsements.this has created a political machine that is incompatible with integrity.with the common man struggling with survival,politicians go unchecked.when Americans are reduced to third world standards,the only rights we will have will be to support the ruling class.its worse than you could ever imagine
2007-03-01 14:21:55 · answer #3 · answered by charles h 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:
"Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "
Most specifically, look at the last statement: "...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
This Amendment states a clear distinction between "any person" and "citizen". This is the highest law in the land. That's how.
2007-03-01 13:55:14 · answer #4 · answered by Michael E 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, some rights apply but they aren't the same as ours, per the Supreme Court.
However, La Raza and the ACLU don't have to interperet the rights since they seems more than willing to make them up.
Michael, equal protection gets them limited due process, not any right to stay and take benefits we pay for.
2007-03-01 13:50:09 · answer #5 · answered by DAR 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are idiots! I have no idea how they come up with their interpretations.
2007-03-01 13:49:41 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
your right, they have no rights as long as they are illegal.
2007-03-01 13:48:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋