Posts

citizen. The drafters of the Constitution knew when they wanted it to apply to people and when they wanted it to apply only to citizens.

The first two paragraphs of Article IV, Section 2, clearly distinguish between "citizen" and "person." It reads:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

Therefore, only citizens are entitled to "privileges and immunities" but all persons charged with a crime who then cross state lines shall "be delivered up." It does not matter if you are a citizen or not if you are a fugitive. Of course that makes sense.

The point, however, is that the Constitution and its Amendments clearly distinguish between "citizen" and "persons." "Citizen" means those either born in the United States (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) or naturalized. "Persons" and "people" mean everyone.

For instance, the First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble...". The First Amendment therefore grants to all people the same protection against certain congressional action, regardless of citizenship status.

The Fourth Amendment, likewise, applies to the "people," and not just citizens. It reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ...".

Likewish, the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, ... nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

And the Sixth Amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused [not just citizens] shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The notion that the U.S. Constitution does not apply to non-citizens is incorrect. It even applies to those in the country illegally. For instance, the government cannot keep an illegal alien locked up indefinitely. An undocumented worker will still get an attorney appointed to him if charged with a crime.  I hope this little blog post helps alleviate that misconception.

In light of the War on Terror, the Patriot Act and the recently passed NDAA, among other legislation, it appears the Constitution doesn't even apply to citizens any longer.

And that is sad.






BlueCarp

<img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4099162-2727750878696408630?l=www.bluecarp.com' alt='' [...] '>

The U.S. Constitution applies to citizens and non-citizens alike. Check the text.


The notion that the U.S. Constitution only protects U.S. citizens is palpably false. It is an indictment of our education system that any American could think such an outrageous thing.

The drafters of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were educated men. They chose their words carefully. They debated over precise word choice. One can assume every word they chose was done with a purpose.

The Constitution and the first ten amendments distinguish between the concept of “people/persons” and the concept of “citizen.” For example, Article I, Section 3, says “No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States…”.

A “person” is therefore different from a “citizen.” Everyone is a person, but only some are citizens.

This distinction is seen again in Article II, Section 1: “No Person except a natural born Citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Again, you may be a person, but you can’t be President unless you are also a citizen. The drafters of the Constitution knew when they wanted it to apply to people and when they wanted it to apply only to citizens.

The first two paragraphs of Article IV, Section 2, clearly distinguish between “citizen” and “person.” It reads:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

Therefore, only citizens are entitled to “privileges and immunities” but all persons charged with a crime who then cross state lines shall “be delivered up.” It does not matter if you are a citizen or not if you are a fugitive. Of course that makes sense.

The point, however, is that the Constitution and its Amendments clearly distinguish between “citizen” and “persons.” “Citizen” means those either born in the United States (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) or naturalized. “Persons” and “people” mean everyone.

For instance, the First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people peaceably to assemble…”. The First Amendment therefore grants to all people the same protection against certain congressional action, regardless of citizenship status.

The Fourth Amendment, likewise, applies to the “people,” and not just citizens. It reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”.

Likewish, the Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, … nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

And the Sixth Amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused [not just citizens] shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The notion that the U.S. Constitution does not apply to non-citizens is incorrect. It even applies to those in the country illegally. For instance, the government cannot keep an illegal alien locked up indefinitely. An undocumented worker will still get an attorney appointed to him if charged with a crime.  I hope this little blog post helps alleviate that misconception.

In light of the War on Terror, the Patriot Act and the recently passed NDAA, among other legislation, it appears the Constitution doesn’t even apply to citizens any longer.

And that is sad.

We are next: DHS now calling domestic dissent “terrorist.”

A Tennessee division of the Department of Homeland Security has put the ACLU on a “terrorist watch list.

Soon, all dissent will be labeled “terrorist” by the feds.

And remember all of the conservative cheer leading behind the notion that “terrorists have no rights.” If “terrorists” have no rights, the next logical step is that the ACLU, as a terrorist organization, has no rights. If the ACLU has no rights, no one that dissents has them.

I have heard some say that the feds will never make the leap between “foreign” terrorists and “domestic” terrorists. They argue that citizens of the United States will always have the protection of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

If you believe that, you are exactly where the statists want you: cheering for the very notion that will enslave you.

You also have no recollection of U.S. history: The U.S. put American citizens in internment camps during World War II for “national security” purposes. Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in the name of “national security.” Both of these examples took place during war, you say, so we need not worry. But, alas, we are at war: The War on Terror.

If we fail to stop the federally inspired hysteria behind terrorism, they will come for the rest of us that dissent.

You can count on it.

Must Evil Always Win?

We’ve all heard the phrase before.  We must vote for the “lesser of two evils” each election season.  That’s all we can do.

It is my humble opinion that this way of thinking is what has gotten us into the mess we are in today.  The mess that involves massive amounts of government spending, regulation, debt and new taxes levied on the American taxpayer.

I’d like to briefly quote a few phrases from our Declaration of Independence.

The first quote warns against complacency and the inability to change:

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”

This second quote follows the first, and sums up the reason I no longer believe politicians are the answer to any of our problems. It is us rather:

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Some may argue that we do not currently have despots ruling our country.  Well perhaps not yet, but we’re headed down that path.  One example of this is shown when a majority of the members of Congress are still trying to ram through a health care bill, even though a majority of Americans oppose it.  Now I must make it clear that I am not an advocate of democracy.  As stated by Thomas Jefferson, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”  I am an advocate of a representative republic which is ruled by the Constitution of the United States.  However, it is a major blow to the taxpayer when a majority of Americans are demanding not to have their income taken for the purpose of crappy health care, and our so-called representatives are essentially saying “too bad, so sad” in response.  It would be perfectly legitimate if 99% of the people wanted government-run health care, and Congress voted it down.  But we all know that would never happen.

Our problem is that we are no longer ruled by the Constitution.  Neither party is following the Constitution.  Yet every four years, we jump out of our seats to vote for one of them.

I am not saying we don’t need to vote for good candidates, because we do.  But that is not the end all, be all.  We need to be fully aware of what our Congressman and State Legislators are doing all throughout each year.  And no matter what political party they are associated with, we need to unify and tell them no more new taxes, regulations or spending.

There are easy ways to give a few minutes of your time each month to find out what is going on with your Representatives.  One of which is by attending your local Liberty on the Rocks meet-up, of course!  We have plenty to learn and teach each other – so why not do it over drinks?!

The second is by locating a local organization that may keep track of all proposed bills and who in your state voted for them.  To find out if there is a free market think tank in your area, check out the directory on the State Policy Network’s website.  Many of the state-based think tanks are beginning to host sites which provide complete and precise legislative information for their respective state, so citizens can be easily updated and can then act if they feel it necessary.  These sites include Michigan Votes and New Mexico Votes.    There are also great organizations to get involved with that are nationwide, such as Americans for Prosperity, American’s for Tax Reform and America’s Future Foundation.

The bottom line is that it’s not about the politicians or the political parties, it’s about principles.  And neither side has had any for a while. It’s time we step up to the plate as the true defenders of our Constitution, and do something to clean up this mess.  I say we start by informing ourselves of the importance of free market capitalism, and then pass this information on to others.   Only then will we have numbers large enough to truly enact “change”.  And by change I mean freedom.