Perhaps this is the test for the Bill of Rights and their application. Rand Paul is not wrong that the wording in the Bill of Rights states "the people" or *persons," not citizens. Therefore, maybe the courts could rule on behalf of illegal immigrants, then it could be elevated to SCOTUS.
The larger perspective is that these are amendments to the Constitution written by "We, the people." Logically, the people referred to in the amendments would be those who are "of the United States."
Hm. Since it is the States which hold primary duties, would it not be the States which would need to declare which are its citizens?
Also I can guarantee 500000000% accuracy that the founding fathers, for example, didn't write the second amendment to protect foreign invaders rights to have a gun in America.
I vote for a speedy trial. Meaning- Put the judge on the plane with them back to their home country. If by the time the get there they are found innocent, they can fly back.
Perhaps this is the test for the Bill of Rights and their application. Rand Paul is not wrong that the wording in the Bill of Rights states "the people" or *persons," not citizens. Therefore, maybe the courts could rule on behalf of illegal immigrants, then it could be elevated to SCOTUS.
The larger perspective is that these are amendments to the Constitution written by "We, the people." Logically, the people referred to in the amendments would be those who are "of the United States."
Hm. Since it is the States which hold primary duties, would it not be the States which would need to declare which are its citizens?
So citizens of the united states.
Also I can guarantee 500000000% accuracy that the founding fathers, for example, didn't write the second amendment to protect foreign invaders rights to have a gun in America.
I vote for a speedy trial. Meaning- Put the judge on the plane with them back to their home country. If by the time the get there they are found innocent, they can fly back.