Mostly what you’ve pointed out here is the corruption of our current judiciary system and all those same points prove we, as a Nation are under attack which means we are in an irregular War. Until this corrupt judiciary is corrected this irregular War will continue.
The Executive Branch’s job is to protect “The People” among many other duties. Nothing you’ve mentioned here has proven the current Executive Branch’s administration has illegally subverted our Laws. The President is fighting the corruption while simultaneously trying to do his job appropriately which past administrations have gone out of their way to subvert and even aided & abetted.
I contest the idea that a questionable state of emergency or “crisis” by the current Executive Branch is being used to make an “end-run” has been used to suspend proper protocols or laws. I submit that the current corrupt judiciary is responsible for the “precedent-setting as each subsequent “crisis” so named and designated leads to more and more abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles” by twisting with their Word Salad the meaning of those very founding and governing principles.
I do agree with you that we were founded as a Nation ruled by Laws. The subversion of those Laws would be our death as that Nation. Who/what is responsible for the corruption that fuels the “…abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles…” is guilty of Treason to this Nation and issues not from the current Executive Branch of the USA.
Since the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America falls to the Judiciary branch of government, it stands that until the corruption in that branch is corrected, proper interpretation of the original Constitution is impossible.
I contend “rights” of a person, illegal or legal, are not the same. An illegal person crossing our borders is not an immigrant, has broken our law & only keeps their right to life and as respect thereof can expect to keep their life while being expelled from our country. An immigrant is a completely different person. They have obeyed our immigration laws and therefore have a right to due process under the conditions of our immigration laws.
These are trying times. We The People are fighting two Wars simultaneously: a Civil War and a Revolutionary War. We fight for our founding principles plus our personal and global sovereignty. We, only by the grace of God, will be truly free.
You have not proved to me our Immigration Laws are in the Constitution. There are those which argue over the interpretation of the Amendments you site. I do not consider your points as definitively ending the argument in favor of all your assertions.
I do not disagree that MILLIONS of persons from in excess of 150 different foreign countries have entered across our northern & southern "borders" unlawfully, at the open invitation of and with great assistance from multiple (U.S. government-funded) NGO's, the United Nations, etc., and in fact were bussed (or flown -- both on unmarked transport vehicles) to destinations of their choosing, given funds, housed in luxury hotels, and that this was done in clear violation of laws and protocols for lawful immigration. Or that our country, the largest child trafficking nation in the world "disappeared" some 300,000 - 500,000 children who crossed these borders most often to be handed off (based on whistleblower testimony of bus drivers who facilitated these and border agents who witnessed it) to "contacts" that were unknown to them (they had only a phone number). I oppose such activities and in fact kept close track on these activities via Michael Yon, war correspondent & former green beret throughout the duration of activities occurring with the prior administration (BTW, he recently reported the camps are still open and there is still an inbound flow. Also, Texas is refusing to enforce the ICE/deportation processes and does not want to follow Florida's precedent-setting example of creating immigration enforcement equivalent officers from local law enforcement). I do not approve nor do I personally believe that undocumented, illegal persons should be granted the same PRIVILEGES as U.S. residents (nationals or citizens, green card holders, or those who are living in keeping with proper protocols).
However, when laws are violated, the appropriate response is not to perpetuate their violation to facilitate acts of aggressive, non-judicial retribution, but to act in a manner accorded civilized nations with respect for law and proper procedure EVEN WHEN ITS EXPENSIVE AND INCONVENIENT. This is true…always, whether we "de-humanize" the persons in question and label them all criminals, animals, "gang members" (as many of them are -- in fact probably Chinese militia along with extremists from middle eastern countries as well), or other derogatory labels (much as we have labeled Palestinians as “terrorists” – including babies, women & children & deemed them worthy of the genocide-in=progress there).
When laws are not equitably (not the same as "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion") followed but instead suspended via extraordinary extra-judicial processes or by fiat command of a would-be Monarch/CEO acting on behalf of the Constitutionally established checks and balances (with a pad of EO’s number well over 110 now) of the three branches, then one has to wonder where the lines will be drawn for let's say, "domestic terrorists" who show up at PTA meetings about pornographic books available to children, or older women silently praying in front of abortion clinics, or those speaking out against activities undertaken by governmental bureaucrats with which they disagree, or citizens protesting what they believe are inequities in the administration of an election process with verifiable anomalies, or church attendees "violating" a "no gathering" dictate during a declared "scamdemic", etc., etc. When lines are blurred for one set of "criminals" then they can certainly be done so for others so labeled (think J6 and the unlawful incarceration of innocent bystanders in what was clearly a setup/entrapment by the intelligence agencies to entrap law abiding citizens). If the laws don't apply uniformly, then they are no longer laws, but suggestions to be negotiated away based on subjective reasoning and mob rule (or worse, dictatorship, totalitarian style).
Concerning the "criminals" you reference and the dismissal of due process as being applicable to them, First, the Constitution mentions "PERSONS" in several places, like the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment says NO PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. The Fourteenth Amendment extends due process and equal protection to ALL PERSONS within a state's jurisdiction. So, even though these amendments don't explicitly mention citizenship, they use "person," which the courts have recognized to include non-citizens.
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, for example, addresses the rights of PEOPLE, not just citizens. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins from the late 1800s, the Supreme Court said that non-citizens are entitled to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. That's a key one, especially in light of the attempt to apply the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. Then there's 1896 WONG WING V U.S., concluded that even illegal immigrants have due process rights and can't be punished without a trial/due process. In Zadvydas v. Davis (2001), the Court ruled that indefinite detention of immigrants, even those here illegally, is not allowed. Plyler v. Doe was about education for undocumented children, invoking equal protection under law. In Mathews v. Diaz (1976), due process for non-citizens in was granted in the context of eligibility for government benefits. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) a Chinese immigrant, a non-citizen, was granted equal protection under law by the Court.
The Fifth Amendment's due process applies to all persons in the U.S., regardless of citizenship. So even if someone is here illegally, they have the right to a fair process before the government can deprive them of life, liberty, or property.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees a speedy trial, impartial jury, etc., for criminal prosecutions. So, if an illegal immigrant is charged with a crime, they get those rights. Immigration proceedings are treated as civil, not criminal, even though, to your point, they are violating the laws of our country by being here. But due process still applies in removal proceedings, as per cases like Yamataya v. Fisher in 1903, which established that deportation requires a fair hearing precede the action.
The United States Constitution extends certain due process rights to all persons within its jurisdiction, including non-citizens and undocumented immigrants, through key amendments and Supreme Court rulings. Below is a structured summary of the relevant provisions and cases:
Constitutional Provisions recognize personhood over citizenship; that means due process and equal protection apply to all "persons," not just citizens. Criminal trials afford full constitutional protections (e.g., Sixth Amendment rights), but even when civil proceedings regarding an immigration issue are in view, they still require basic due process be adhered to notice and a hearing).
While every person living in the U.S. enjoys rights & privileges (that are incrementally being eclipsed, removed & made conditional based upon arbitrarily dictated adherence to subjective, prohibitional activities that are not congruent with established Constitutional Law), and those who have not followed established processes, procedures and laws established to manage the flow of incoming potential residents/citizens, failure to adequately follow the provisions of our governance charter and the decisions regarding specific provisions of it is a slippery slope that grants unconstitutional exercise of executive power that is not in keeping with the principles enumerated for how a Constitutional Republic is intended to function.
Convenience, expedience, end-runs – these signal to me that indeed the suspension of Constitutional governance under the PREP ACT is being leverage by multiple administrations to exercise latitude that is not theirs to exercise, by virtue of a declared emergency that was a thinly veiled excuse for transferring administration and responsibility for the production, distribution and waiver of standard protocols/safety measures, trials & approvals for “Bioweapons Countermeasures injections via the Department of Defense -- with no liability or recourse, and no efficacy or rationale beyond the initial HHS declaration required to apply any due diligence or regulatory accountability. We now see that as precedent-setting as each subsequent “crisis” so named and designated leads to more and more abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles.
Yes, it is messy, complex and time-consuming. Its part of the price we pay for the “freedom” we so eagerly claim we wish to defend (as long as when it’s punitive, it applies to “others” not us).
The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for due process rights for both citizens and non-citizens within the United States. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to the federal government, while the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to state governments. The term "person" in both clauses has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status, when they are physically present in the United States.
In the context of deportation proceedings, which are civil proceedings conducted by the federal government, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is particularly relevant. While the level of due process required in civil proceedings like deportation differs from that required in criminal proceedings, non-citizens facing deportation are still entitled to certain fundamental procedural protections. These protections are derived from the constitutional guarantee of due process and are designed to ensure fairness in the process by which the government seeks to remove an individual from the country.
These due process rights for non-citizens in deportation proceedings typically include:
Notice of the charges and the opportunity to be heard.
The right to present evidence and cross-examine government witnesses.
The right to legal representation (though generally at no cost to the government).
The right to a decision based on the evidence presented.
The right to appeal the decision.
The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), but these statutory and regulatory provisions must comply with the constitutional requirements of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court has consistently held that non-citizens within the United States are entitled to due process of law in deportation proceedings, recognizing that deportation can result in a significant deprivation of liberty and property interests.
An “Immigrant” is defined by Webster Dictionary as: a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.
This implies they are following our immigration laws and are filing appropriate legal documents for immigration status.
“Illegal” is defined as: (1 of 2) not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT
(2 of 2) a person who enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry or residence
I contend that a person who breaks unlawfully into our country without appropriate legal documentation for permission to enter is UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT, making them a criminal and therefore does NOT qualify for the “due process” you claim our Constitution grants. Yes, they are a Noncitizen however they are a Criminal noncitizen. We have legal borders, Laws regarding proper entry procedures. I VERY much doubt the sections of our Constitution to which you reference were intended to protect a person who is NOT an authorized immigrant. They are a Criminal because they entered our country not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT and enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry or residence.
Your statement that, “The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations,…” has a fatal flaw. These people are NOT immigrants. They are criminals from other countries. Had they adhered to our Immigration laws your argument would have had more weight. Those “rights” to immigration proceedings might have applied. However, they are NOT immigrants. They do not qualify for the protections of due process you implied. They are law breaking criminals and should be promptly Deported.
You have not shown our Constitution grants a non citizen who is also a non immigrant a right to “due process”.
Again you have spoken the truth, it is time to root out Republicans that lie, cheat and steal. Period! Also, I agree about the Pope, I never liked him. He seemed to me to be a fake, unconcerned with anything but himself and his lies were so obvious, his mouth opened and I shivered, not in fear but in knowing that he was Satan's tool.
IGNORE AND DEPORT! FIRE the compromised, Soros funded, corrupt judges!!! They have NOT BEEN UPHOLDING THE LAW! They’ve been ignoring their legal responsibilities!
Trump should take this time to RECONSTRUCT the U.S. political landscape! NO Democrats! Period! Eliminate the entire corrupt party! Eliminate every crooked judge! Do what he wants! LIKE THEY DO!! SNUB the Supreme Court! SNUB these nationwide injunctions from radical judges! I’m so fucking tired of the bullshit! Never did I expect to see pimples on the ass of progress the way we have seen it thus far with these illegal invaders and the desperate attempts to keep them here crippling this nation! Fuck evvvvverybody and ship out every last one! The judicial efforts this far are DISGUSTING!! Why is Mayorkas not being charged?? You take one of the most sacred positions in our Gov. He did the opposite of his job description on day 1! Lied daily about the border situation! I’m losing faith fast! Unless Trump starts to realize he has Hegseth so WTF are they going to do to him? DO WHAT WE VOTED FOR & get these people the fuck out of here before dozens more Americans die!
2) Whether we "like it" or not, the idea of jettisoning the law as it presently stands because it's inconvenient or time-consuming or "unfair" does not provide sufficient grounds for acting like a third world country with no due process -- a process that one of us may indeed wish to heve impeccably in place and enforced should we be accused and man-handled into a difficult situation (think January 6).
Specific Constitutional Amendments and subsequent court interpretations include citizens and non-citizens in the mandatory application of "due process".
The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for due process rights for both citizens and non-citizens within the United States. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to the federal government, while the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to state governments. The term "person" in both clauses has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status, when they are physically present in the United States.
In the context of deportation proceedings, which are civil proceedings conducted by the federal government, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is particularly relevant. While the level of due process required in civil proceedings like deportation differs from that required in criminal proceedings, non-citizens facing deportation are still entitled to certain fundamental procedural protections. These protections are derived from the constitutional guarantee of due process and are designed to ensure fairness in the process by which the government seeks to remove an individual from the country.
These due process rights for non-citizens in deportation proceedings typically include:
Notice of the charges and the opportunity to be heard.
The right to present evidence and cross-examine government witnesses.
The right to legal representation (though generally at no cost to the government).
The right to a decision based on the evidence presented.
The right to appeal the decision.
The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), but these statutory and regulatory provisions must comply with the constitutional requirements of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court has consistently held that non-citizens within the United States are entitled to due process of law in deportation proceedings, recognizing that deportation can result in a significant deprivation of liberty and property interests.
Everyday the Congress stalls and avoids doing their jobs, specifically arresting the J6 subcommittee, is another day we inch closer to their removal for misprision of treason and violation their oaths of office
We are sick of corrupt democrats going AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
Show me where the Constitution says an illegal alien has “due process” rights.
I’ll wait.
Mostly what you’ve pointed out here is the corruption of our current judiciary system and all those same points prove we, as a Nation are under attack which means we are in an irregular War. Until this corrupt judiciary is corrected this irregular War will continue.
The Executive Branch’s job is to protect “The People” among many other duties. Nothing you’ve mentioned here has proven the current Executive Branch’s administration has illegally subverted our Laws. The President is fighting the corruption while simultaneously trying to do his job appropriately which past administrations have gone out of their way to subvert and even aided & abetted.
I contest the idea that a questionable state of emergency or “crisis” by the current Executive Branch is being used to make an “end-run” has been used to suspend proper protocols or laws. I submit that the current corrupt judiciary is responsible for the “precedent-setting as each subsequent “crisis” so named and designated leads to more and more abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles” by twisting with their Word Salad the meaning of those very founding and governing principles.
I do agree with you that we were founded as a Nation ruled by Laws. The subversion of those Laws would be our death as that Nation. Who/what is responsible for the corruption that fuels the “…abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles…” is guilty of Treason to this Nation and issues not from the current Executive Branch of the USA.
Since the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America falls to the Judiciary branch of government, it stands that until the corruption in that branch is corrected, proper interpretation of the original Constitution is impossible.
I contend “rights” of a person, illegal or legal, are not the same. An illegal person crossing our borders is not an immigrant, has broken our law & only keeps their right to life and as respect thereof can expect to keep their life while being expelled from our country. An immigrant is a completely different person. They have obeyed our immigration laws and therefore have a right to due process under the conditions of our immigration laws.
These are trying times. We The People are fighting two Wars simultaneously: a Civil War and a Revolutionary War. We fight for our founding principles plus our personal and global sovereignty. We, only by the grace of God, will be truly free.
You have not proved to me our Immigration Laws are in the Constitution. There are those which argue over the interpretation of the Amendments you site. I do not consider your points as definitively ending the argument in favor of all your assertions.
I do not disagree that MILLIONS of persons from in excess of 150 different foreign countries have entered across our northern & southern "borders" unlawfully, at the open invitation of and with great assistance from multiple (U.S. government-funded) NGO's, the United Nations, etc., and in fact were bussed (or flown -- both on unmarked transport vehicles) to destinations of their choosing, given funds, housed in luxury hotels, and that this was done in clear violation of laws and protocols for lawful immigration. Or that our country, the largest child trafficking nation in the world "disappeared" some 300,000 - 500,000 children who crossed these borders most often to be handed off (based on whistleblower testimony of bus drivers who facilitated these and border agents who witnessed it) to "contacts" that were unknown to them (they had only a phone number). I oppose such activities and in fact kept close track on these activities via Michael Yon, war correspondent & former green beret throughout the duration of activities occurring with the prior administration (BTW, he recently reported the camps are still open and there is still an inbound flow. Also, Texas is refusing to enforce the ICE/deportation processes and does not want to follow Florida's precedent-setting example of creating immigration enforcement equivalent officers from local law enforcement). I do not approve nor do I personally believe that undocumented, illegal persons should be granted the same PRIVILEGES as U.S. residents (nationals or citizens, green card holders, or those who are living in keeping with proper protocols).
However, when laws are violated, the appropriate response is not to perpetuate their violation to facilitate acts of aggressive, non-judicial retribution, but to act in a manner accorded civilized nations with respect for law and proper procedure EVEN WHEN ITS EXPENSIVE AND INCONVENIENT. This is true…always, whether we "de-humanize" the persons in question and label them all criminals, animals, "gang members" (as many of them are -- in fact probably Chinese militia along with extremists from middle eastern countries as well), or other derogatory labels (much as we have labeled Palestinians as “terrorists” – including babies, women & children & deemed them worthy of the genocide-in=progress there).
When laws are not equitably (not the same as "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion") followed but instead suspended via extraordinary extra-judicial processes or by fiat command of a would-be Monarch/CEO acting on behalf of the Constitutionally established checks and balances (with a pad of EO’s number well over 110 now) of the three branches, then one has to wonder where the lines will be drawn for let's say, "domestic terrorists" who show up at PTA meetings about pornographic books available to children, or older women silently praying in front of abortion clinics, or those speaking out against activities undertaken by governmental bureaucrats with which they disagree, or citizens protesting what they believe are inequities in the administration of an election process with verifiable anomalies, or church attendees "violating" a "no gathering" dictate during a declared "scamdemic", etc., etc. When lines are blurred for one set of "criminals" then they can certainly be done so for others so labeled (think J6 and the unlawful incarceration of innocent bystanders in what was clearly a setup/entrapment by the intelligence agencies to entrap law abiding citizens). If the laws don't apply uniformly, then they are no longer laws, but suggestions to be negotiated away based on subjective reasoning and mob rule (or worse, dictatorship, totalitarian style).
Concerning the "criminals" you reference and the dismissal of due process as being applicable to them, First, the Constitution mentions "PERSONS" in several places, like the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment says NO PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. The Fourteenth Amendment extends due process and equal protection to ALL PERSONS within a state's jurisdiction. So, even though these amendments don't explicitly mention citizenship, they use "person," which the courts have recognized to include non-citizens.
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, for example, addresses the rights of PEOPLE, not just citizens. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins from the late 1800s, the Supreme Court said that non-citizens are entitled to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. That's a key one, especially in light of the attempt to apply the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. Then there's 1896 WONG WING V U.S., concluded that even illegal immigrants have due process rights and can't be punished without a trial/due process. In Zadvydas v. Davis (2001), the Court ruled that indefinite detention of immigrants, even those here illegally, is not allowed. Plyler v. Doe was about education for undocumented children, invoking equal protection under law. In Mathews v. Diaz (1976), due process for non-citizens in was granted in the context of eligibility for government benefits. In Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) a Chinese immigrant, a non-citizen, was granted equal protection under law by the Court.
The Fifth Amendment's due process applies to all persons in the U.S., regardless of citizenship. So even if someone is here illegally, they have the right to a fair process before the government can deprive them of life, liberty, or property.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees a speedy trial, impartial jury, etc., for criminal prosecutions. So, if an illegal immigrant is charged with a crime, they get those rights. Immigration proceedings are treated as civil, not criminal, even though, to your point, they are violating the laws of our country by being here. But due process still applies in removal proceedings, as per cases like Yamataya v. Fisher in 1903, which established that deportation requires a fair hearing precede the action.
The United States Constitution extends certain due process rights to all persons within its jurisdiction, including non-citizens and undocumented immigrants, through key amendments and Supreme Court rulings. Below is a structured summary of the relevant provisions and cases:
Constitutional Provisions recognize personhood over citizenship; that means due process and equal protection apply to all "persons," not just citizens. Criminal trials afford full constitutional protections (e.g., Sixth Amendment rights), but even when civil proceedings regarding an immigration issue are in view, they still require basic due process be adhered to notice and a hearing).
While every person living in the U.S. enjoys rights & privileges (that are incrementally being eclipsed, removed & made conditional based upon arbitrarily dictated adherence to subjective, prohibitional activities that are not congruent with established Constitutional Law), and those who have not followed established processes, procedures and laws established to manage the flow of incoming potential residents/citizens, failure to adequately follow the provisions of our governance charter and the decisions regarding specific provisions of it is a slippery slope that grants unconstitutional exercise of executive power that is not in keeping with the principles enumerated for how a Constitutional Republic is intended to function.
Convenience, expedience, end-runs – these signal to me that indeed the suspension of Constitutional governance under the PREP ACT is being leverage by multiple administrations to exercise latitude that is not theirs to exercise, by virtue of a declared emergency that was a thinly veiled excuse for transferring administration and responsibility for the production, distribution and waiver of standard protocols/safety measures, trials & approvals for “Bioweapons Countermeasures injections via the Department of Defense -- with no liability or recourse, and no efficacy or rationale beyond the initial HHS declaration required to apply any due diligence or regulatory accountability. We now see that as precedent-setting as each subsequent “crisis” so named and designated leads to more and more abuses and excuses for not acting in congruence with our founding and governing principles.
Yes, it is messy, complex and time-consuming. Its part of the price we pay for the “freedom” we so eagerly claim we wish to defend (as long as when it’s punitive, it applies to “others” not us).
The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for due process rights for both citizens and non-citizens within the United States. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to the federal government, while the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to state governments. The term "person" in both clauses has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status, when they are physically present in the United States.
In the context of deportation proceedings, which are civil proceedings conducted by the federal government, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is particularly relevant. While the level of due process required in civil proceedings like deportation differs from that required in criminal proceedings, non-citizens facing deportation are still entitled to certain fundamental procedural protections. These protections are derived from the constitutional guarantee of due process and are designed to ensure fairness in the process by which the government seeks to remove an individual from the country.
These due process rights for non-citizens in deportation proceedings typically include:
Notice of the charges and the opportunity to be heard.
The right to present evidence and cross-examine government witnesses.
The right to legal representation (though generally at no cost to the government).
The right to a decision based on the evidence presented.
The right to appeal the decision.
The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), but these statutory and regulatory provisions must comply with the constitutional requirements of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court has consistently held that non-citizens within the United States are entitled to due process of law in deportation proceedings, recognizing that deportation can result in a significant deprivation of liberty and property interests.
An “Immigrant” is defined by Webster Dictionary as: a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.
This implies they are following our immigration laws and are filing appropriate legal documents for immigration status.
“Illegal” is defined as: (1 of 2) not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT
(2 of 2) a person who enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry or residence
I contend that a person who breaks unlawfully into our country without appropriate legal documentation for permission to enter is UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT, making them a criminal and therefore does NOT qualify for the “due process” you claim our Constitution grants. Yes, they are a Noncitizen however they are a Criminal noncitizen. We have legal borders, Laws regarding proper entry procedures. I VERY much doubt the sections of our Constitution to which you reference were intended to protect a person who is NOT an authorized immigrant. They are a Criminal because they entered our country not according to or authorized by law : UNLAWFUL, ILLICIT and enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry or residence.
Your statement that, “The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations,…” has a fatal flaw. These people are NOT immigrants. They are criminals from other countries. Had they adhered to our Immigration laws your argument would have had more weight. Those “rights” to immigration proceedings might have applied. However, they are NOT immigrants. They do not qualify for the protections of due process you implied. They are law breaking criminals and should be promptly Deported.
You have not shown our Constitution grants a non citizen who is also a non immigrant a right to “due process”.
I am still waiting for that proof.
Again you have spoken the truth, it is time to root out Republicans that lie, cheat and steal. Period! Also, I agree about the Pope, I never liked him. He seemed to me to be a fake, unconcerned with anything but himself and his lies were so obvious, his mouth opened and I shivered, not in fear but in knowing that he was Satan's tool.
👍👍👍
IGNORE AND DEPORT! FIRE the compromised, Soros funded, corrupt judges!!! They have NOT BEEN UPHOLDING THE LAW! They’ve been ignoring their legal responsibilities!
We’re completely and thoroughly sick and disgusted with the left’s double standards. 🤬🤬
Only citizens deserve due process in my opinion
WHAT THE FUCK ARE THE REPUBLICANS DOING???? I sit here reading on NOTHING! We are short timers until mid terms.
Get your useless asses moving or I can assure they will move one way or another!
You have the power - USE IT!!!🤬🤬🤬
Sick of this … rigged for their own benefit
👍
Trump should take this time to RECONSTRUCT the U.S. political landscape! NO Democrats! Period! Eliminate the entire corrupt party! Eliminate every crooked judge! Do what he wants! LIKE THEY DO!! SNUB the Supreme Court! SNUB these nationwide injunctions from radical judges! I’m so fucking tired of the bullshit! Never did I expect to see pimples on the ass of progress the way we have seen it thus far with these illegal invaders and the desperate attempts to keep them here crippling this nation! Fuck evvvvverybody and ship out every last one! The judicial efforts this far are DISGUSTING!! Why is Mayorkas not being charged?? You take one of the most sacred positions in our Gov. He did the opposite of his job description on day 1! Lied daily about the border situation! I’m losing faith fast! Unless Trump starts to realize he has Hegseth so WTF are they going to do to him? DO WHAT WE VOTED FOR & get these people the fuck out of here before dozens more Americans die!
if one does not subscribe to the rules, then they don’t get the protection thereof.
Fuck em send them back in boxes at this point
2) Whether we "like it" or not, the idea of jettisoning the law as it presently stands because it's inconvenient or time-consuming or "unfair" does not provide sufficient grounds for acting like a third world country with no due process -- a process that one of us may indeed wish to heve impeccably in place and enforced should we be accused and man-handled into a difficult situation (think January 6).
Specific Constitutional Amendments and subsequent court interpretations include citizens and non-citizens in the mandatory application of "due process".
The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provide the basis for due process rights for both citizens and non-citizens within the United States. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to the federal government, while the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause applies to state governments. The term "person" in both clauses has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include non-citizens, regardless of their immigration status, when they are physically present in the United States.
In the context of deportation proceedings, which are civil proceedings conducted by the federal government, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment is particularly relevant. While the level of due process required in civil proceedings like deportation differs from that required in criminal proceedings, non-citizens facing deportation are still entitled to certain fundamental procedural protections. These protections are derived from the constitutional guarantee of due process and are designed to ensure fairness in the process by which the government seeks to remove an individual from the country.
These due process rights for non-citizens in deportation proceedings typically include:
Notice of the charges and the opportunity to be heard.
The right to present evidence and cross-examine government witnesses.
The right to legal representation (though generally at no cost to the government).
The right to a decision based on the evidence presented.
The right to appeal the decision.
The specific procedures and rights afforded in immigration proceedings are primarily governed by federal statutes and regulations, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), but these statutory and regulatory provisions must comply with the constitutional requirements of due process as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court has consistently held that non-citizens within the United States are entitled to due process of law in deportation proceedings, recognizing that deportation can result in a significant deprivation of liberty and property interests.
Everyday the Congress stalls and avoids doing their jobs, specifically arresting the J6 subcommittee, is another day we inch closer to their removal for misprision of treason and violation their oaths of office
FACT