In your opinion, should the guarantees of equal treatment under the law in the U.S. Constitution apply to indi

Question

I have this for my english essay and I need to hear different opinions. Thanks for the help :)

Again the questions is:
In your opinion, should the guarantees of equal treatment under the law in the U.S. Constitution apply to individuals in the country who are not U.S. citizens? Why or why not?

Answer 1

We should extend the principles in our constitution to everyone or what good is it? Unfair treatment could only mean that we don't stand by what our country is founded on. I don't subscribe to the "it's only good for us, not for them" mentality. It gets a whole lot more complex as an issue than what I just said, but that's my gut reaction; the ideal.

Answer 2

Thomas Paine wrote in his broadside, Common Sense:

"But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve as monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it is."

Now, ever since the case of Marbury vs. Madison, the United States have understood that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It consists of words. The process of understanding the words is known as "construction." As in "how to you construe the terms in the Constitution."

So, the Constitution consists of words, and who would understand the Constitution must read the words, and understand them, for the words, which are law, are King.

In this context, therefore, let us turn to the words of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The XIV Amendment is a fundamental charter of liberty and it is at least as important as the Bill of Rights. The XIV Amendment is one of the three Amendments that were enacted to reconstitute the United States after the Unpleasantness known to some as the War Between the States. The amendment says:

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

Notice that the people who wrote this Amendment knew the difference between "citizen" and "all persons," forasmuch in one sentence the Amendment forbids abridging the rights of CITIZENS, and mandates that all PERSONS receive equal protection of the laws.

That's the law. It has been the law as long as all the slaves have been free. It's not a good idea to change a law so well-rooted in our history and our law just because some people do not like Mexicans.

And that is, ultimately, what this is all about. Fear and loathing of our neighbor on the south, a great nation whose people love us even though the United States has stolen its best territory in the name of "Manifest Destiny." No matter. They are taking it back. Trying to stop it is like trying to hold back the ocean with a sieve, and 'sieve' is a good term for the border.

Besides, if we exclude all foreign labor, we can forget about harvesting the high-value California farm output, and THAT would be a big enough hit to the economy to trigger a depression. A real one.

Do not fear change. The Mexicans are an adaptable, tolerant people. They swallowed the Roman Catholic Church as an appetizer: the USA will not be such a big challenge.

Don't forget: you already speak Spanish. Everyone speaks SOME Spanish. ¿No? ¡Si!

Answer 3

That is a matter of negotiation and treaties across countries in my opinion.

The Constitution is essentially a declaration of the rules of our sovereignty, and who it applies to, and where. Other countries have their own similar documents or traditions.

Most of the time issues of sovereignty don't conflict, but when they do we have two methods, diplomacy and war, to resolve them.

If other sovereign countries expect treatment from our country and its citizens over and above what the law provides for, they are certainly welcome to ask. But why should it be anything less then a matter of negotiation, (e.g tit for tat) or force in order to resolve it?

Answer 4

I don't believe they should, because our enemies are figuring out how to use our laws and freedoms against us, and they're becoming very good at it and if we don't start seeing this for what it really is we're in very deep trouble.

Answer 5

To individuals who are LEGALLY in this country, yes.