170 dems vote against Laken Riley Act.

oxat622 said:
The world at large is not all within the the country's jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
And a citizen's complete US Constitutional rights are not within the scope of an illegal alien's potential legal arguments.

Except maybe in "Candyland", at 45th and Chester. They have no loyalty, or shame.
 
[W]ithout due process of law is the operative phrase. Yes, that part of the constitution applies to everyone whether a citizen or not. But if this act were to pass, it'd absolutely be constitutional. Suggesting otherwise would mean there'd be no such thing as US citizenship at all.
 
jackson03 said:
[W]ithout due process of law is the operative phrase. Yes, that part of the constitution applies to everyone whether a citizen or not. But if this act were to pass, it'd absolutely be constitutional. Suggesting otherwise would mean there'd be no such thing as US citizenship at all.
Click to expand...
Right.

Then Democrats are off to the races, making up what is due to an illegal alien.
 
jackson03 said:
[W]ithout due process of law is the operative phrase. Yes, that part of the constitution applies to everyone whether a citizen or not. But if this act were to pass, it'd absolutely be constitutional. Suggesting otherwise would mean there'd be no such thing as US citizenship at all.
Click to expand...
Where is that in the House Bill?
 
jackson03 said:
It's not, it doesn't need to be. An alien would be given due process to prove that he or she was not convicted of theft or was wrongly convicted, as any other visitor to the United States would be.
Click to expand...
That language isn't in the House Resolution, besides the person in question was convicted but just let go.
 
We've got an abortion of a constitutional law discussion going on in here.

1) Absolutely anyone can petition under due process. It doesn't matter if you're an illegal alien, the government of Argentina, heck you can even be Saddam Hussein. The courts are open!

2) Laken Riley Act = theft, therefore deportation. That does not remove the ability to petition to say either a) I was wrongly convicted; or b) I was acquitted. But if the Congress says you're convicted of theft and you're not a naturalized citizen and the courts see no recourse... you're leaving.

The real issue is whether there's the manpower to do this. And right now the answer is no.
 
jackson03 said:
It's not, it doesn't need to be. An alien would be given due process to prove that he or she was not convicted of theft or was wrongly convicted, as any other visitor to the United States would be.
Click to expand...
What about illegals?

Or don't you use that word?
 
jackson03 said:
Look at the post immediately above yours. I'm arguing for you guys and you're acting like buffoons. No wonder the problem never gets solved.
Click to expand...
I'm arguing against illegals being give a free pass to come here, a court date three years from now, and a credit card to live on while they're here, free health care and school for their little illegals.
 
jackson03 said:
We've got an abortion of a constitutional law discussion going on in here.

1) Absolutely anyone can petition under due process. It doesn't matter if you're an illegal alien, the government of Argentina, heck you can even be Saddam Hussein. The courts are open!

2) Laken Riley Act = theft, therefore deportation. That does not remove the ability to petition to say either a) I was wrongly convicted; or b) I was acquitted. But if the Congress says you're convicted of theft and you're not a naturalized citizen and the courts see no recourse... you're leaving.

The real issue is whether there's the manpower to do this. And right now the answer is no.
Click to expand...
The abortion is believing you can trespass across a border and go hey I have every right a citizen does.
 
y2h said:
The abortion is believing you can trespass across a border and go hey I have every right a citizen does.
Click to expand...
1710187202020.png
 
OldSoulon said:
I'm arguing against illegals being give a free pass to come here, a court date three years from now, and a credit card to live on while they're here, free health care and school for their little illegals.
Click to expand...
No, you're arguing I don't use the word "illegals" when I do all the time and just did above.

A liberal poster said the proposed law was unconstitutional, which was wrong. A bunch of conservatives jumped on board and started making even more outlandish claims that non-citizens can't get a writ of certiorari, which is even more wrong. You don't even have to be present in the country to get one.
 
jackson03 said:
We've got an abortion of a constitutional law discussion going on in here.
1) Absolutely anyone can petition under due process. It doesn't matter if you're an illegal alien, the government of Argentina, heck you can even be Saddam Hussein. The courts are open!
2) Laken Riley Act = theft, therefore deportation. That does not remove the ability to petition to say either a) I was wrongly convicted; or b) I was acquitted. But if the Congress says you're convicted of theft and you're not a naturalized citizen and the courts see no recourse... you're leaving.
The real issue is whether there's the manpower to do this. And right now the answer is no.
Click to expand...
Fund it, and they will come.

Lots of qualified folks out there, if you ask the right way. It will take far fewer qualified men than you might think if the right people write the new rules, and you hire well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top