169
US Supreme Court lets Texas border enforcement law take effect
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
169 points (98.8% liked)
News
23297 readers
3909 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This "supreme" court is illegitimate.
I'm sad to say that we had roughly 50 years of sensible judges. This is SCOTUS gone back to normal.
They have repeatedly deemed that states can overrule the federal government when it's the federal government's jurisdiction. They have repeatedly deemed the constitution is not enforceable. They have deemed that if they can argue vagueness in wording, it is either all encompassing or entirely non-binding based on the political leanings of issue. They have taken null cases with hypothetical damages in order to make rulings. The 3 Trump appointees deemed Roe v Wade settled law before overturning it.
Okay. You're not a citizen anymore. And you no longer have any rights.
See why rights have to extend to everyone within our borders now?
Nope. Big government over there says you're here illegally now. The guys with guns will be along anytime now to enforce your deportation. If you resist you're going to be arrested and sentenced to work in the factory for no pay for several years and then dumped in Mexico.
That's not the point. If non citizens have no rights then you have no recourse to prove you're actually a citizen once they declare you're not a citizen.
Which is just one reason SCOTUS has consistently ruled that rights extend to everyone in our borders. The other is that many of our rights are actually restrictions on government power. And allowing the government to operate without those restrictions, even just on some people, builds the infrastructure for doing it to citizens.
Don't get your face eaten by a leopard.
You're absolutely incorrect.
In the US, anyone within the borders of the country are given the same right to due process as everyone else. This applies to undocumented immigrants.
Oh okay. So since the US is your country of origin (in this case) and it says you have no rights, then you have no rights.
Yay, glad we could clear that up.
Not by your definition.
Fun fact, legal citizens have been deported by ICE before because they didn't care to check the paperwork correctly
To say nothing of RvW, do you really think the constitution doesn’t provide some rights beyond citizens? For context, check out the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. More importantly, you won’t find this delineation in the Bill of Rights. Immigrants are granted due process, as written in the 14th as “any person”. There are many protections granted to all, precisely because we believed all are equal. This is well established constitutional law.
No. Everybody. Full stop.
It never ceases to amaze me how citizens of a nation can be so utterly wrong about what's in their own constitution and bill of rights.
And I say this as a Canadian, because we've got Canadians quoting the Second Amendment like it's law up here.
sigh
Hang on, hang on, I think you missed it. It applies to "ALL PERSONS." You'll note that it does not include "unless you're an illegal immigrant."
You’re just wrong here. And that’s okay, but take an opportunity to learn. Although many are deported without knowing there was a hearing, there still is what is taken to mean due process. See https://www.uclalawreview.org/the-ice-trap-deportation-without-due-process/
The fact is, you can just actually take a look at the 14th amendment. Or try to find the term citizen in any of the first 10. Or just keep being confidently incorrect.
The constitution absolutely does protect all people in many situations, and only xenophobia combined with poor education can lead somebody to disputing that.
Funny, I didn't even comment on immigrant rights or the validity of RvW.