Do Illegal Aliens have 2A Rights, SCOTUS to decide

[Rockrivr1]

This is a tough one. Illegal Aliens is illegal in the US, though you'd never know it. 2A case involving Illegal Alien to SCOTUS.







This is behind a paywall. I'll see if I can find another article.

Illegal immigrants test limits of Second Amendment in case now pending at Supreme Court

Even as the Biden administration moves toward leniency toward illegal immigrants on so many fronts, there’s a line the government hasn’t crossed: Possessing a firearm is still a serious offense.

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[fishgutzy]

Simple fix. Only those in the country legally have "access" to any of the rights of citizens.
The only thing anyone in the country illegaly is "entitled" to is a one way ticket home. Send the bill for all services renedered to illegal aliens to the treasury departments of their home countries. If that country does not pay, start confiscating assets they hold in the US.

 

[JRT]

I would rather see the rights of felons who have done their time restored first. I don't see any reason why illegals shouldn't have full 2A rights, the vast majority are here working and contributing.

 

[June4th]

How'bout keeping your jackboots off us law-abiding citizens first before you worry about illegals?

 

[lancecolonel]

who else sees the argument being made that if "undocumented visitors" can have guns then they can also obviously vote?

 

[one-eyed Jack]

I would rather see the rights of felons who have done their time restored first. I don't see any reason why illegals shouldn't have full 2A rights, the vast majority are here working and contributing.

Bullshit. They are criminals, pure and simple. The only "right" they have is to GTFO. Jack.

 

[snd1t]

If an individual is present in the US illegally then how could they possibly have a RKBA while ILLEGALLY in the US?

Being here illegally is a crime.....so are these folks now "Undocumented Criminals"?

 

[StevieP]

Just my humble opinion. "Citizens" have rights. Mere "residents" do not.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

The only right they have is the right to leave at their own expense.

We don't grant invading armies such rights. How are invading citizens any different?

Hostile invasion is hostile invasion... They are coming here to take for themselves from others here legally... That makes them no different than others who do so while wearing a uniform....

GTFO and never come back. Being apprehended as an illegal should result in a lifetime bar of citizenship or even visitation....

 

[ThePreBanMan]

who else sees the argument being made that if "undocumented visitors" can have guns then they can also obviously vote?

Exactly!!!!

 

[ReluctantDecoy]

If an individual is present in the US illegally then how could they possibly have a RKBA while ILLEGALLY in the US?

Being here illegally is a crime.....so are these folks now "Undocumented Criminals"?

Maddening, isn't it?!? Whether or not illegals can have guns is clearly the wrong question. Immigration through proper means and channels is one thing, but illegal is illegal.

The parts that drives me the most insane is that this is unilateral. From all the global traveling I've done, America is the only country I've seen that not only tolerates this, but seems to condone it. An American trying to do this over seas would be detained and/or exported. Because illegal is illegal. Hell, if you overstay a tourist via by even 1 day, you'll get fined, and then possibly detained and/or exported on your own dime, depending on country.

 

[dragonballzz]

who else sees the argument being made that if "undocumented visitors" can have guns then they can also obviously vote?

The 15th Amendment refers to the Citizens' Right to vote.
The 2nd Amendment refers to the People's Right to bear arms.

 

[wilson911]

Simple fix. Only those in the country legally have "access" to any of the rights of citizens.
The only thing anyone in the country illegaly is "entitled" to is a one way ticket home. Send the bill for all services renedered to illegal aliens to the treasury departments of their home countries. If that country does not pay, start confiscating assets they hold in the US.

One addition to your spot-on analysis. In addition to confiscating their US-held property, we should also penalize their Aid dollars. That should give countries incentive to stop it on their end.

 

[Parker Schreiber]

This is a tough one. Illegal Aliens is illegal in the US, though you'd never know it. 2A case involving Illegal Alien to SCOTUS.

This is behind a paywall. I'll see if I can find another article.

Illegal immigrants test limits of Second Amendment in case now pending at Supreme Court

Even as the Biden administration moves toward leniency toward illegal immigrants on so many fronts, there’s a line the government hasn’t crossed: Possessing a firearm is still a serious offense.

www.washingtontimes.com

Here's the Supreme Court Docket item. Note that review hasn't been granted.

Search

www.supremecourt.gov

Here's the 2nd Circuit Ruling.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca2-19-00620/pdf/USCOURTS-ca2-19-00620-0.pdf

Here's a bit of dicta from a previous Supreme Court decision:

While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that "the people" protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community. (United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 1990).​

Illegal Immigrants do have some Constitutional Rights -- despite Trump's tweets to the contrary, we can not "with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came.” But I don't see the Supreme Court taking this particular case.

 

[daekken]

Just my humble opinion. "Citizens" have rights. Mere "residents" do not.

The Supreme Court already rejected that argument.

For starters, in 1982 they ruled illegal immigrants were entitled to K-12 education as well.

 

[free]

I think all humans have 2A-like rights, whether an American or not.

By virtue of being human, not due to any nationality or "status."

 

[StevieP]

The Supreme Court already rejected that argument.

For starters, in 1982 they ruled illegal immigrants were entitled to K-12 education as well.

Which of the enumerated rights described in the Constitution or its Amendments guarantees a right to K-12 education?

 

[daekken]

Which of the enumerated rights described in the Constitution or its Amendments guarantees a right to K-12 education?

I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with the ruling, just that non-citizens have been extended the protections of the Bill of Rights for about 123 years:
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark - in 1898 the Supreme Court ruled that the term “person” under the Fifth Amendment applied to aliens living in the U.S.

Furthermore: In Fong Yue Ting v. U.S.,the court held that Chinese laborers, “like all other aliens residing in the United States,” are entitled to protection of the laws.

 

[yanici]

As 'illegals" they are clearly criminals in possession of a firearm. Are they "felons" in possession?

 

[StevieP]

I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with the ruling, just that non-citizens have been extended the protections of the Bill of Rights for about 123 years:
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark - in 1898 the Supreme Court ruled that the term “person” under the Fifth Amendment applied to aliens living in the U.S.

Furthermore: In Fong Yue Ting v. U.S.,the court held that Chinese laborers, “like all other aliens residing in the United States,” are entitled to protection of the laws.

As I said at the outset, it was "just my humble opinion." probably a good thing I'm not a judge.

 

[daekken]

As I said at the outset, it was "just my humble opinion." probably a good thing I'm not a judge.

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion.

My opinion is that self-defense is a natural right, which the Constitution codifies, but does not grant.

I was just pointing out that your opinion has over a century of case law against it, for practical purposes.

 

[jeepchute]

The 2nd amendment doesn't grant anybody rights. It (in theory) prevents the government from infringing on a right people have. All people. A person here illegally shouldn't be restricted from self defense any more than anyone else. Once found they should not remain here however.

Everybody has a right to self defense by any means necessary in proportion to the threat. Most countries infringe on that right. In the US, that shouldn't happen...to anyone. Deportation of illegals is totally separate.

Be careful of the slippery slope that is division. Only the "people" as we define them. He is part of a right wing dissident group, they are not "the people". They are on the no-fly list and therefore not "the people". The People are those citizens that have never said anything bad about the government, Never disagreed with the CDC, never participated in an insurrection (protest we disagree with).

Edit:to make paragraphs.

 

[Dennis in MA]

Simple fix. Only those in the country legally have "access" to any of the rights of citizens.
The only thing anyone in the country illegaly is "entitled" to is a one way ticket home. Send the bill for all services renedered to illegal aliens to the treasury departments of their home countries. If that country does not pay, start confiscating assets they hold in the US.

Tough call. So illegals should have no rights? We can beat them in the streets? The police can just arrest them and jail them and hold them with no trial forever.

I'm thinking some rights are universal. Are gun rights universal? I'm thinking yes. But I tend to be pretty aggressive on 2A issues.

 

[dragonballzz]

Tough call. So illegals should have no rights? We can beat them in the streets? The police can just arrest them and jail them and hold them with no trial forever.

I'm thinking some rights are universal. Are gun rights universal? I'm thinking yes. But I tend to be pretty aggressive on 2A issues.

The right to self defense is natural / universal. The best tool for self defense is sometimes a gun.

 

[one-eyed Jack]

Tough call. So illegals should have no rights? We can beat them in the streets? The police can just arrest them and jail them and hold them with no trial forever.

I'm thinking some rights are universal. Are gun rights universal? I'm thinking yes. But I tend to be pretty aggressive on 2A issues.

Well, you rob a bank and get arrested for a crime. You commit a crime by coming into the country illegally and should be arrested also. Jack.

 

[mu2bdriver]

Well, you rob a bank and get arrested for a crime. You commit a crime by coming into the country illegally and should be arrested also. Jack.

That's an extreme example but ignored the vast shades of grey that have to be accounted for, including LEO/DA discretion. Dreams of mass deporations are dreams. Anything that expands the 2A rights to more people is a good thing. We can't argue God-given rights on one hand and then Citizens on the other. If anything, I can see the decision denying rights based on the expansion of the administrative state. And out of all the 2A cases SCOTUS could hear, they chose this one? I guess it's better than nothing.

 

[JRT]

That's an extreme example but ignored the vast shades of grey that have to be accounted for, including LEO/DA discretion. Dreams of mass deporations are dreams. Anything that expands the 2A rights to more people is a good thing. We can't argue God-given rights on one hand and then Citizens on the other. If anything, I can see the decision denying rights based on the expansion of the administrative state. And out of all the 2A cases SCOTUS could hear, they chose this one? I guess it's better than nothing.

I don't think its been picked up and most experts think it will not be. I'm with you, I'm generally going to side with expanding 2A rights.

 

[ReluctantDecoy]

I think all humans have 2A rights whether an American or not.

I agree with the underlying notion, but the "We" and "people" in "We the people" is referring to US citizens. It was written as such to flex on England and the monarchy in a display of self-reliance and self-governance. So the Second Amendment also applies to citizens, even if it states "people".

That said, I can also see the benefit of expanding 2A rights however it may be expanded. My issue with this approach though is the continued blessing of citizen rights to non-citizens, most of which could be considered "illegal". How is it that some dude who barely speaks English, has never paid taxes, and refuses to acculturate ends up with some of the same citizen benefits as me who has done all of the above over decades? I don't want to sound Xenophobic, and I do keep an open mind to actual immigration, but where's the line? To me, it should be immigration through legal means, naturalization, then congrats fellow American, here's a gun! I could even see legit green card/H1 visa holders being included.

 

[daekken]

I agree with the underlying notion, but the "We" and "people" in "We the people" is referring to US citizens. It was written as such to flex on England and the monarchy in a display of self-reliance and self-governance. So the Second Amendment also applies to citizens, even if it states "people".

Do you have a case showing that? All the current cases I'm familiar with reject this notion, whether in 1898, or 2008 (Boumediene v. Bush, which ruled non-citizens were entitled to Habeas Corpus, even in Guantanamo Bay). There might be ones pertaining to slaves or something that have been subsequently overturned.

 

[BigGreen2000]

If illegal aliens are found to have 2A rights, there is not much preventing other courts from finding they have voting rights, Medicare and Medicaid rights, ObamaCare rights, public school education rights, run for elected rights, and so on. What's the point of being a legal citizen if all those rights are granted to illegals anyway?