The Second Amendment Does Not Extend To Illegal Aliens

[Rightguide]

Federal Appeals Court Rules Illegal Immigrants Have No Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms​

by Jim Hᴏft Sep. 2, 2024 11:30 am

The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has ruled that illegal immigrants do not have the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.

This ruling is a significant victory for the rule of law and American sovereignty, as it underscores the importance of upholding the rights and protections reserved for U.S. citizens.

The case involved Jose Paz Medina-Cantu, a Mexican national who was arrested in Texas by Border Patrol agents in 2022.


Medina-Cantu, who had illegally re-entered the United States after being deported, thanks to Biden-Harris open border, was found in possession of a handgun.

More here: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/09/federal-appeals-court-rules-illegal-immigrants-have-no/

And I would argue illegal aliens should have zero rights under the Constitution.

 

[ll74]

Yes it does.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Rights and privileges asserted by a country's government only apply to it's legal citizens?

Who'd have thunk it?

 

[ll74]

Please explain where in the Constitution it defines citizenship as a qualifier to any amendment.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Please explain where in the Constitution it defines citizenship as a qualifier to any amendment.

Why should that matter? The court ruled, therefore it must be the case. Just ask any Trump hater who points to court rulings about Trump.

 

[ll74]

Why should that matter? The court ruled, therefore it must be the case. Just ask any Trump hater who points to court rulings about Trump.

So the Constitution doesn't matter.

Got it

 

[HisArpy]

So the Constitution doesn't matter.

Got it

That's not what he said and you know it. So why don't you just quit being a prick?

 

[coony1029]

Please explain where in the Constitution it defines citizenship as a qualifier to any amendment.

We the people of the United States. It's assumptive. However these are human god given rights so it gets tricky. I don't think either argument is easily dismissed. But if people aren't adhering to the founding principles of the country do they have access to these rights? Where is the line drawn?

 

[TastySuckToy]

So the Constitution doesn't matter.

Got it

Does this mean you agree that just because a court ruled something, doesn't make it true or accurate?

 

[ll74]

We the people of the United States. It's assumptive. However these are human god given rights so it gets tricky. I don't think either argument is easily dismissed. But if people aren't adhering to the founding principles of the country do they have access to these rights? Where is the line drawn?

Are non citizens not in the United States?

SCOTUS seems to believe so

Adhering to anything is not a requirement.

 

[Bray123]

That's what happens when you start believing Jim Hoft, folks.

 

[Rightguide]

Please explain where in the Constitution it defines citizenship as a qualifier to any amendment.

This ruling will go to the SCOTUS. If they don't have the right to be here they do not have full rights granted to citizens under the constitution. The have limited rights.

 

[coony1029]

If I'm in your house can I do whatever I want? Am I a member because I step on a private golf course? Inversely since I have these god given rights and I state an unpopular opinion in the UK and get arrested do I still have those rights?

 

[ll74]

This ruling will go to the SCOTUS. If they don't have the right to be here they do not have full rights granted to citizens under the constitution. The have limited rights.

What determines whether they have a right to be here

Hint: it's not what you think it is

 

[ll74]

If I'm in your house can I do whatever I want? Am I a member because I step on a private golf course? Inversely since I have these god given rights and I state an unpopular opinion in the UK and get arrested do I still have those rights?

Fun with false equivalencies

 

[coony1029]

Fun with false equivalencies

From the one hiding his profile refusing to engage in discourse. Reddit is down the street. Your troll buddys are waiting

 

[AlexBailey]

And I would argue illegal aliens should have zero rights under the Constitution.

If you support this it’s good to know that you support positive ID and through background checks on all firearms purchases, including between private parties.

Is a ten day waiting period and robust government database good enough?

 

[DeluxAuto]

This ruling will go to the SCOTUS. If they don't have the right to be here they do not have full rights granted to citizens under the constitution. The have limited rights.

Can convicted felons own firearms?

 

[Rightguide]

What determines whether they have a right to be here

Hint: it's not what you think it is

The 14th Amendment and federal law.

 

[ll74]

The 14th Amendment and federal law.

So you ignore immigration laws....which are federal.

 

[RABear]

Retired Army, gun owner, former gun dealer and part time gunsmith here. My oath was to "protect and defend the Constitution" not to any person, office or ideology.
Having said that, to the best of my knowledge, the Constitution applies to anyone within the geographical boundaries of the US. This is why we maintain Gitmo and why the ICE/USCG try to prevent folks from actually setting foot on US soil. This is one of the major reasons for the construction of, and kerfuffle over, the Mexico-US border wall.
Sales between individual can't be policed so the point may be moot.
However, if you believe that someone has entered the US in a manner contrary to law, then that individual cannot LEGALLY purchase at all. BATFE Form 4473 (https://formswift.com/downloads/atf-form-4473/atf-form-4473.pdf) starts with question 11 d. states "d. Are you a fugitive from justice?" which anyone who commits a crime is even if no court has handed out an indictment. Think hit and run driver. Question 11, k. is more to the point: "k. Are you an alien illegally in the United States?"
Question 15: "15. If you are not a citizen of the United States, what is your U.S.-issued alien number or admission number?"
Dealers must submit requests for an NICS background check. Some states may require additional checks.
Long way to get here but, simply stated, it appears that an ILLEGAL (aka "undocumented") alien/non-citizen cannot legally obtain a firearm. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with it.

 

[ll74]

Retired Army, gun owner, former gun dealer and part time gunsmith here. My oath was to "protect and defend the Constitution" not to any person, office or ideology.
Having said that, to the best of my knowledge, the Constitution applies to anyone within the geographical boundaries of the US. This is why we maintain Gitmo and why the ICE/USCG try to prevent folks from actually setting foot on US soil. This is one of the major reasons for the construction of, and kerfuffle over, the Mexico-US border wall.
Sales between individual can't be policed so the point may be moot.
However, if you believe that someone has entered the US in a manner contrary to law, then that individual cannot LEGALLY purchase at all. BATFE Form 4473 (https://formswift.com/downloads/atf-form-4473/atf-form-4473.pdf) starts with question 11 d. states "d. Are you a fugitive from justice?" which anyone who commits a crime is even if no court has handed out an indictment. Think hit and run driver. Question 11, k. is more to the point: "k. Are you an alien illegally in the United States?"
Question 15: "15. If you are not a citizen of the United States, what is your U.S.-issued alien number or admission number?"
Dealers must submit requests for an NICS background check. Some states may require additional checks.
Long way to get here but, simply stated, it appears that an ILLEGAL (aka "undocumented") alien/non-citizen cannot legally obtain a firearm. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with it.

What they said

 

[UltraChad]

So you ignore immigration laws....which are federal.

I don't think he is a Kamala supporter or Democrat.

So the Constitution doesn't matter.

Got it

Not generally no.

Retired Army, gun owner, former gun dealer and part time gunsmith here. My oath was to "protect and defend the Constitution" not to any person, office or ideology.
Having said that, to the best of my knowledge, the Constitution applies to anyone within the geographical boundaries of the US. This is why we maintain Gitmo and why the ICE/USCG try to prevent folks from actually setting foot on US soil. This is one of the major reasons for the construction of, and kerfuffle over, the Mexico-US border wall.
Sales between individual can't be policed so the point may be moot.
However, if you believe that someone has entered the US in a manner contrary to law, then that individual cannot LEGALLY purchase at all. BATFE Form 4473 (https://formswift.com/downloads/atf-form-4473/atf-form-4473.pdf) starts with question 11 d. states "d. Are you a fugitive from justice?" which anyone who commits a crime is even if no court has handed out an indictment. Think hit and run driver. Question 11, k. is more to the point: "k. Are you an alien illegally in the United States?"
Question 15: "15. If you are not a citizen of the United States, what is your U.S.-issued alien number or admission number?"
Dealers must submit requests for an NICS background check. Some states may require additional checks.
Long way to get here but, simply stated, it appears that an ILLEGAL (aka "undocumented") alien/non-citizen cannot legally obtain a firearm. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with it.

It actually does. It highlights that all those infringements that Democrats just LOVE are unconstitutional.

ATF should be abolished.

 

[ll74]

I don't think he is a Kamala supporter or Democrat.

Perhaps, but that is not relevant to what I said

Not generally no.

Got it

 

[IrezumiKiss]

From the one hiding his profile refusing to engage in discourse.

You can freely talk to him right here, in this thread, by replying to his posts. That doesn't mean you are automatically owed a reply or even a conversation.