@AverageJoe1 saidI've answered this over and over and over again. You don't like the answer, but that's TFB.
How many times do I have to say the constitution was not written for folks not citizens of this country. Or we can assume foreigners that are in this country who committed a crime. Why don’t we leave it at that. I’m not gonna study it. But I will throw this back at you……
Is every human in the world, about 8 billion, entitled to due process under the constitution of the United States no matter where they are. That’s probably a yes or no answer.
Every person the US government is trying to punish for violating the laws of the United States is entitled to due process under the 5th Amendment. That's what it says.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidThey are in the ocean somewhere. Not here. You want to save them with half-baked ides they have rights. Natural rights.
I've answered this over and over and over again. You don't like the answer, but that's TFB.
Every person the US government is trying to punish for violating the laws of the United States is entitled to due process under the 5th Amendment. That's what it says.
Big picture ? You defend these animals. Not fishermen. Not vacationing. No suitcase. Kill them. Sorry.
You defend Somali in MN too? , and The murderer of the United Health CEO? Charles Manson?
You like Tim Walz for V?
Dems got any policies to start campaigning on you’ve only got a year ago. You never tell us one policy. Not one , all you talk about is Trump. What a weak bunch of posters. I don’t call you de debaters anymore , just posters.
You and Sonhouse.
Oh, you never did tell us. Is every human being on earth covered by the United States due process clause of the constitution?
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidOMG, you're an idiot. I've answered that question at least a dozen times.
They are in the ocean somewhere. Not here. You want to save them with half-baked ides they have rights. Natural rights.
Big picture ? You defend these animals. Not fishermen. Not vacationing. No suitcase. Kill them. Sorry.
You defend Somali in MN too? , and The murderer of the United Health CEO? Charles Manson?
You like Tim Walz for V?
Dems got any ...[text shortened]... . Is every human being on earth covered by the United States due process clause of the constitution?
The 5th Amendment doesn't create any rights - it recognizes a limitation on what a government can rightfully do. And that limitation applies to all persons, just like the Amendment says.
You're never going to get out of 8th grade unless you improve your reading skills.
@no1marauder saidYou did not incorporate 'due process' in this post.
OMG, you're an idiot. I've answered that question at least a dozen times.
The 5th Amendment doesn't create any rights - it recognizes a limitation on what a government can rightfully do. And that limitation applies to all persons, just like the Amendment says.
You're never going to get out of 8th grade unless you improve your reading skills.
You are all over the place. No need to complete it or round it out, I think I know who of the 8 billion are covered by The Due Process clause. People inside the USA. If I can say that without silly patter, why can't you?
Humanity, morality, natural nature, etc , that is something else again.
@AverageJoe1 saidThat's not what it says, is it? It says the US government can deprive no person of life, liberty or property without due process.
You did not incorporate 'due process' in this post.
You are all over the place. No need to complete it or round it out, I think I know who of the 8 billion are covered by The Due Process clause. People inside the USA. If I can say that without silly patter, why can't you?
Humanity, morality, natural nature, etc , that is something else again.
It doesn't say "citizens".
It doesn't say "people inside the United States".
RIF.
@no1marauder saidYour hot-under-the-collar seeps between your lines.
That's not what it says, is it? It says the US government can deprive no person of life, liberty or property without due process.
It doesn't say "citizens".
It doesn't say "people inside the United States".
RIF.
The middle of this para may settle you down, but you can always drag out Natural Clause, or whatever you call it. "applies to non-citizens within the United States....no matter whether they are unlawful involuntary or transitory.
Right....it doesn't say citizens, it says non-citizens. Non-citizens are covered if they are here.**** NOT if they are speeding across the caribbean from Haiti to Venezuala. Fair game.
"Person"
The Due Process Clauses apply to both natural persons, including citizens and non-citizens, as well as to "legal persons" (that is, corporate personhood). The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause was first applied to corporations in 1893 by the Supreme Court in Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co.[19] Noble was preceded by Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad in 1886. The Due Process Clauses apply to non-citizens within the United States – no matter whether their presence may be or is "unlawful, involuntary or transitory"[20] – although the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that non-citizens can be stopped, detained, and denied past immigration officials at points of entry (e.g. at a port or airport) without the protection of the Due Process Clause because, while technically on U.S. soil, they are not considered to have entered the United States.[21][20]
*** 'They are here' means within the United states. i can rewrite it more understandably if you would like.
2 edits
@AverageJoe1 saidAre you claiming the US government could simply murder persons at points of entry?
Your hot-under-the-collar seeps between your lines.
The middle of this para may settle you down, but you can always drag out Natural Clause, or whatever you call it. "applies to non-citizens within the United States....no matter whether they are unlawful involuntary or transitory.
Right....it doesn't say citizens, it says non-citizens. Non-citizens are covered ...[text shortened]... y are here' means within the United states. i can rewrite it more understandably if you would like.
The reason why the DPC doesn't apply to persons seeking entry is because they are not being deprived of life, liberty or property. That doesn't mean they have no rights has you stupidly seem to "think".
@AverageJoe1 saidWe aren't killing people in Borneo.
They are 2000 miles away. You are wrong. Rest easy.
Did you not see my post earlier that only US citizens have due process rights, that people in Borneo do not have our process rights? now if Borneo Joe comes here and does what illegal aliens do here we will have to deal with him in the process. He is on our shores.
@no1marauder saidNote that this post avoids the point that the boat vermin have no right of due process, which I explain above.
Are you claiming the US government could simply murder persons at points of entry?
The reason why the DPC doesn't apply to persons seeking entry is because they are not being deprived of life, liberty or property. That doesn't mean they have no rights has you stupidly seem to "think".
Instead he deflects or detours, or whatever libs who lose do.
I don’t know what he is talking about. Sonhouse prevails at not answering questions, this one a close second with avoiding proofs and clarifications.
@AverageJoe1 saidGod you're dense.
Note that this post avoids the point that the boat vermin have no right of due process, which I explain above.
Instead he deflects or detours, or whatever libs who lose do.
I don’t know what he is talking about. Sonhouse prevails at not answering questions, this one a close second with avoiding proofs and clarifications.
If you are claiming persons on the high seas can be killed by the US government whenever it pleases because they have no due process rights, then by the logic you used in your last post so can persons seeking entry into the US at designated points of entry because they have no due process rights.
Obviously that position is untenable.
@no1marauder saidBut this post is untenable in itself. You have written a post about whether the United States can kill anybody on the high seas. This issue is being disgusting universally and has not been resolved yet. So you and I cannot decide whether the United States can unequivocally kill people in boats on high seas.
God you're dense.
If you are claiming persons on the high seas can be killed by the US government whenever it pleases because they have no due process rights, then by the logic you used in your last post so can persons seeking entry into the US at designated points of entry because they have no due process rights.
Obviously that position is untenable.
But you see this issue is about due process, which you say applies to these foreigners. I have proven to you that it does not. And you have not responded in that regard in any way……you are hiding as you see me win this point. I know you hate the word win, but this is a good example of it.
@boonon saidWhat illegal drugs? If they really had drugs Trump would capture boats to prove they have drugs. He doesn't because he knows they don't nave drugs.
There should be a death sentence for bringing illegal drugs into the country.
Those are not fishing boats.
He wants to invade to steal their oil and you know it.