Reply With Quote
You certainly are trying hard tonight not explain your theory.Yea, you're right. I just make up my own truth. Oh wait, that would be you, sociopath.
Why would they spell out one thing and leave the other open to misinterpretation, derp?
Step up.
Yea, you're right. I just make up my own truth. Oh wait, that would be you, sociopath.
You certainly are trying hard tonight not explain your theory.Yea, you're right. I just make up my own truth. Oh wait, that would be you, sociopath.
Why would they spell out one thing and leave the other open to misinterpretation, derp?
Step up.
The founders clearly understood that once you start creating voting hurdles, only the inherited upper classwould be making decisions on rulers. They did not want this. We must remember what many of them came from and who they were; Risk taking, resourceful people who did not fit with the born in elite. Very able, unrecognized or rejecting inherited status... people who had seen all sorts of treachery in leadership and revolution. They knew the type of crap familial inherited elite could create. And the horrors that occur if mob/populists decided it was time for scapegoating while throwing out a rotten monarchy or corrupt elite. Europe had seen so much bloodshed time and time again when leadership vascillated between extremes.
So of course the cons ution is important. But what the actual people had been through directly, or through their painful past, helps in interpretation. Naked power grabs or a populist culture’s fickle menace scared them. The real intellectuals had seen and read it all. And they had real disagreements on how to avoid what scared them.
imo...
Tell me what the motivation is to explaining it? It's not like it'll bring contrition to a sociopath such as yourself. It can't be for the W; I get W's on you daily anyhow. Tell me a new or good motivation and I'll show you how you're being your standard jackass self.
I know you don't want to explain yourself and will whine and and act out until you can change the subject.
That's all you have at this point.
You will never explain yourself.
You will never defend your claims.
You're afraid.
You're terrified.
You're stupid.
That's all.
That's actually not true. The Cons ution largely refers to 'people' or 'persons', except where it's very specific about citizenship (ie: Executive office).
There's case law about it. For example, see: Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993) In the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment en les aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.”
Also, illegal aliens that have been in the country for over 2 years are required to have hearing, and their due process must be respected. That's why I mention non-national citizens, where citizen doesn't imply actual nationality, but the sense of belonging to a certain society after a period of time.
Do you have a question?Looks like your bs detector went off at the same time
Yes there is, and it's quite explicit:
Fifth Amendment: "No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
Fourteen Amendment has 3 clauses: privileges and immunities, due process, and equal protection. The privileges and immunities clause applies to "citizens of the United States" while the due process and equal protection clauses apply to "persons."
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.
Again, aliens are not afforded all the rights, but certainly some rights. More case law: Castro v. Cabrera, 742 F. 3d 595 (5th Cir. 2014), Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510 (2003).
There's also a 'sliding scale' SCOTUS standard applied for the rights that do apply to aliens in the US (see United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez).
Actually, most recently, this whole topic came to the fore with Garza v. Hargan.
I ask for motivation, and you throw out every lame come-on in your quiver.
Person in the fourteenth amendment would be specific language to designate blacks no longer as 3/5th a person.
Person in the fifth amendment would've been used quite likely because the inhabitants considered their personage above national citizenry (most were higher on state citizenry at the time). Also, again citizenship was obviously implied. The Cons ution wasn't written as a do ent to be used by foreign nationals for instance.
The Supreme Court often takes liberty with interpretation. That doesn't mean much to me as it relates to the original framework of the Cons ution.
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211-12 (1982) (illegal aliens protected by equal protection clause);
Wong Wing v. United States, 163 U.S. 228, 238 (1896) (resident aliens en led to fifth and sixth amendment rights);
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S.356, 369 (1886) (fourteenth amendment protects resident aliens).
Even legal residents are not citizens and clearly enjoy Cons utional protections, at least within the jurisdiction of the US, so that's a bridge that was burned a long time ago (case law dates back to the 1800's).
If anything, the fact that everybody, including most illegal aliens will get their day in court speaks very highly of the American judicial system, something other countries can't really match.
I don't particularly think that was unintentional by the framers. Especially when they very very specific on what and where they required citizenship.
Then again, I can totally see the outrage in this day and age if some State came up with the idea of aliens voting.
Yet here you are taking liberty with interpretation
Also, again citizenship was obviously implied.
lawyers work extremely hard to keep the court house door closed, seeking plea deals, settlements, etc.
Esp bad when innocent (non-white) people are railroaded into pleas (5 years if plead guilty, 25 years if you don't)
The corruption of DAs and prosecutors has been well do ented.
And of course the oligarchy's SCOTUS, esp so-called Catholic Scalia, has horribly reduced what cons utes a class in class actions
Forced arbitration as condition of employment also slams the court house door shut.
Fascist Incarceration Nation (for profit) stains America so-called judicial system.
Elected judges', as in state supreme courts, with campaigns financed by the oligarchy?
"very highly of the American judicial system,"
Last edited by boutons_deux; 09-21-2018 at 02:15 PM.
Nobody is forced to take a plea deal, tbh, but I also think it's also part of the balance of having a speedy trial system.lawyers work extremely hard to keep the court house door closed, seeking plea deals, settlements, etc.
Esp bad when innocent (non-white) people are railroaded into pleas (5 years if plead guilty, 25 years if you don't)
The corruption of DAs and prosecutors has been well do ented.
And of course the oligarchy's SCOTUS, esp so-called Catholic Scalia, has horribly reduced what cons utes a class in class actions
Forced arbitration as condition of employment also slams the court house door shut.
Fascist Incarceration Nation (for profit) stains America so-called judicial system.
Elected judges' campaign financed by the oligarchy?
"very highly of the American judicial system,"
It's not perfect, but sure better than most others out there.
"Nobody is forced to take a plea deal"
?? I've read articles where INNOCENT people were given a "choice" of, eg, 5 years with plea, or decades with no plea.
Then there is forced confessions after long hours of tortuous, brutal questioning.
K, got. sancho went from ing your ol lady to becoming your ol man.
you've never been to jail nor know wtf you're talking about. white guilt has you losing your ing mind.lawyers work extremely hard to keep the court house door closed, seeking plea deals, settlements, etc.
Esp bad when innocent (non-white) people are railroaded into pleas (5 years if plead guilty, 25 years if you don't)
The corruption of DAs and prosecutors has been well do ented.
And of course the oligarchy's SCOTUS, esp so-called Catholic Scalia, has horribly reduced what cons utes a class in class actions
Forced arbitration as condition of employment also slams the court house door shut.
Fascist Incarceration Nation (for profit) stains America so-called judicial system.
Elected judges', as in state supreme courts, with campaigns financed by the oligarchy?
"very highly of the American judicial system,"
i am/was an innocent white male who was railroaded for 3 yrs and declined the plea deal. tell me again how much you know about the judicial system.
you know nothing except posting articles you don't read and neither do we. you're a pathetic sissy boy.
When the Republican party sends people to Washington they're not sending the best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to Washington. They're bringing drugs. They are bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
Actually, I don't think any party sends their best.
The best won't put up with the they have to do to get elected. In this political environment one can't possibly get elected without lying and compromising their values.
You tripped over Bill Clinton there.
Hastert, what?You tripped over Bill Clinton there.
Rights are one thing. Privileges are another.
Yea, big liberty to state that an American cons ution was for Americans.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
