ACTUAL, CURRENT court rulings on Constitutional Protections for Non-Citizens?

[whitebear]

A lot of sound and fury has been expended in these forums recently concerning whether or not individuals who are residents, but not citizens, of the USA, either legally or (Gasp!) illegally are to be afforded constitutional protection.

Being a computer techie type, I am not familiar with the intricacies of US law on this issue. Could some of you who are more familiar with the legal system (for whatever reason... ) shed some light on this topic? What do the courts actually say?

Yes, I mean the 9th Circuit, as well...

 

[USMCRotrHed]

Constitutional protections

It is widely accepted in the legal arena that constitutional rights are extended to anyone within our borders whether they are here legally or illegally, citizens or non-citizens. This is supported by case law from several different jurisdictions.

I don't like illegals getting to use my rights, but consider this scenario: You get pulled over for a routine stop (or anything) and you are out of town and just had you wallet stolen. You can not prove to the officer that you are a resident of the good ol' US of A. Because of the above applications of constitutional rights, you are given the right to counsel and humane treatment which will give you the chance to show who you are, and be treated decently.

It's one of those we gotta give it to them to ensure we always get it situations.

 

[whitebear]

Thanks for your response, USMC.

I certainly agree with your position. My posing of the question is in response to the numerous recent posts in which many THRers posted opinions that illegal aliens/immigrants/migrants/<insert your synonym here> were not entitled to constitutional protections.

I am really trying to drive a stake in the sand of this discussion - it would be nice to be able to reference this or a similar thread whenever the discussion turns to this topic, and things start to get heated.

 

[Cosmoline]

Of course, if the laws were actually enforced all illegals would be given hard prison time after a fair trial. Instead they are just returned to Mexico to try it again the next week.

A very large wall, DMZ and minefield would violate no international law, infringe on no constitutional rights and would ensure that no Mexicans risked their lives to chance it. Couple that with very large sanctions including prison time for any US citizen who hires any illegal and the problem would be solved post haste.