This is 110% irrefutable evidence the Democrats are the Domestic Enemies of the United States Of America

[Ripmany]

I going to be a Democrat

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

So, according to Trump, if a group of US citizens decided to murder 100 illegal aliens, it would not be the US Government’s job to protect those illegal aliens from the US citizens. Is that a true interpretation of what was said? Are you righties in agreement with that?

If he doesn't stand up, then ...

[royamcr]

He'd have to prove to me how "illegal aliens" are endangering Americans. Sure there some "bad apples" just like Republicans ignored things leading up to 9/11. For the most part undocumenteds here create far less crime than US citizens.

Where is that Republican led border bill now? Biden was ready to sign it.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by royamcr

He'd have to prove to me how "illegal aliens" are endangering Americans. Sure there some "bad apples" just like Republicans ignored things leading up to 9/11. For the most part undocumenteds here create far less crime than US citizens.

Where is that Republican led border bill now? Biden was ready to sign it.

didn't need one. that was all stall tactics by Biden and his Dem handlers to allow 10-12 million illegals to flood in the nation. on purpose. Trump by simply allowing Border patrol to do its job stopped the flood immediately. proof Biden and the Democrats wanted mass illegal immigration.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

didn't need one. that was all stall tactics by Biden and his Dem handlers to allow 10-12 million illegals to flood in the nation. on purpose. Trump by simply allowing Border patrol to do its job stopped the flood immediately. proof Biden and the Democrats wanted mass illegal immigration.

Trump actually had that bill killed, which conveniently gave him a platform to run on.

Republicans also killed a bipartisan immigration bill in 2013.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/t...the-perplexed/

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Turner2099

Trump actually had that bill killed, which conveniently gave him a platform to run on.

Republicans also killed a bipartisan immigration bill in 2013.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/t...the-perplexed/

what does border security and immigration have to do with funding Ukraine? Nothing, that's why it failed.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

So, according to Trump, if a group of US citizens decided to murder 100 illegal aliens, it would not be the US Government’s job to protect those illegal aliens from the US citizens. Is that a true interpretation of what was said? Are you righties in agreement with that?

The short answer oddly is no. The Constitution does not require the US Government to protect anyone, citizen or not. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments only prevent the Federal and State government from harming people, citizen or not.

The Supreme Court said the Constitution protects people from the state, not guarantees that the state will protect them from each other (DeShaney v. Winnebago County).

It is not the first duty of the American government to protect American citizens, according to the Constitution. Like txdot-guy said, it was a trap. A thinly veiled political trap.

Protection duties arise in certain situations. If someone is taken into custody, the government must provide for their safety and basic needs. The 100 illegal aliens would be protected in this situation.

Protection duties arise in some federal circuits when there is a state-created danger. Most federal circuits recognize some version of state-created danger, but they use slightly different tests. The others are more skeptical of the duty requirement because this has never been fully endorsed by the Supreme Court.

Has Trump caused a state-created danger by clearly vilifying illegal aliens, or almost any immigrant for that matter? That would have to be determined by the Federal courts and most likely the Supreme Court, but if it was determined he did, then the US Government would be required to protect the 100 illegal aliens.

As we know, when the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments declare that no "person" shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, they specifically do not include "citizen". Other parts of the Constitution do make specific references to citizens, so clearly there's a distinction.

Logically, it would follow that if an Amendment or Amendments were made to require the US and state governments to protect people from being deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, the language would specify "person", not "citizen". Then the 100 illegal aliens would be protected in any situation.

Morally, though, of course it's the US Government's job to protect the 100 illegal aliens, just as it is obligated to protect the citizens if the situation were reversed. Anyone arguing otherwise is demented.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

what does border security and immigration have to do with funding Ukraine? Nothing, that's why it failed.

It was a negotiated bipartisan bill and like all bills, had multiple parts. When Trump said he didn't like it because of the immigration piece, Johnson refused to even bring it to a vote.

[pxmcc]

what would Jefferson say? or Lincoln? or JFK? or Reagan?

you don't need to be a Con Law scholar to know the answer..

Originally Posted by Turner2099

The short answer is no. The Constitution does not require the US Government to protect anyone, citizen or not. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments only prevent the Federal and State government from harming people, citizen or not.

The Supreme Court said the Constitution protects people from the state, not guarantees that the state will protect them from each other (DeShaney v. Winnebago County).

It is not the first duty of the American government to protect American citizens, according to the Constitution. Like txdot-guy said, it was a trap. A thinly veiled political trap.

Protection duties arise in certain situations. If someone is taken into custody, the government must provide for their safety and basic needs. The 100 illegal aliens would be protected in this situation.

Protection duties arise in some federal circuits when there is a state-created danger. Most federal circuits recognize some version of state-created danger, but they use slightly different tests. The others are more skeptical of the duty requirement because this has never been fully endorsed by the Supreme Court.

Has Trump caused a state-created danger by clearly vilifying illegal aliens, or almost any immigrant for that matter? That would have to be determined by the Federal courts and most likely the Supreme Court, but if it was determined he did, then the US Government would be required to protect the 100 illegal aliens.

As we know, when the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments declare that no "person" shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, they specifically do not include "citizen". Other parts of the Constitution do make specific references to citizens, so clearly there's a distinction.

Logically, it would follow that if an Amendment or Amendments were made to require the US and state governments to protect people from being deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, the language would specify "person", not "citizen". Then the 100 illegal aliens would be protected in any situation.

Morally, though, of course it's the US Government's job to protect the 100 illegal aliens, just as it is obligated to protect the citizens if the situation were reversed. Anyone arguing otherwise is demented.