Skip to main content

View Diary: German Critic of NSA Denied Entry into the US (79 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You have the Freedom of Speech (0+ / 0-)

    and you can criticize your government, and are currently doing so.

    You have these as an American citizen.  What state was Ilija Trajanow born in?

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 09:42:09 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Rights of his US citizen hosts were violated (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mrkvica, sacrelicious

      The only winning move is not to play. - Joshua

      by FightersFate on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 10:03:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  LOL.. um...well.. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        GoGoGoEverton, jrooth

        First, I appreciate ANYONE on this site for actually going out and doing legal research rather then just using their own intuition of what the Constitution should mean or referencing such things as the Mirrian-Webster dictionary or something.

        So, seriously, I appreciate the link.  I am not being snarky or sarcastic.   But...

        You missed a key word of that summary:  Reversed

        The SCOTUS ruled that the Attorney General DOES have the right to refuse entry of anyone into the United States.

        It is the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 whereby Congress authorizes the Executive (and thereby the Attorney General as delegated from the President) to exclude aliens and prescribe the conditions for entry into the US.

        Kleindienst was specifically related to barring people that had advocated for Communism, but the ruling would hold on any grounds.

        Held: In the exercise of Congress' plenary power to exclude aliens or prescribe the conditions for their entry into this country, Congress in § 212(a)(28) of the Act has delegated conditional exercise of this power to the Executive Branch. When, as in this case, the Attorney General decides for a legitimate and bona fide reason not to waive the statutory exclusion of an alien, courts will not look behind his decision or weigh it against the First Amendment interests of those who would personally communicate with the alien. Pp. 408 U. S. 761-770.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 10:20:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, sadly that is still the controlling precedent (0+ / 0-)

          Wrongly decided, in my humble opinion, and both dissents, that of Justice Douglas and of Justice Marshall (Justice Brennan joining) are worth reading for the First Amendment analysis which the majority (after ably describing the First Amendment question) declined to consider in favor of Congress' "plenary power to exclude aliens or prescribe the conditions for their entry into this country."

          "That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything ... There would be no place to hide." - Senator Frank Church

          by jrooth on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 11:25:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Ouch... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mrkvica

      unalienable rights apparently don't belong to people if they aren't American born....or...check again:

      http://www.unalienable.com/...

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
      •  DoI is not law, its a Declaration of War (0+ / 0-)

        Legally it is a "moral guide" for interpreting the Constitution, a position most notably argued by Abraham Lincoln.  It has no statutes.  It was ratified by no states.  It authorizes no government.

        US Laws, rights and punishments, do not apply to non-US citizens any more than EU Rights can be legally claimed by US citizens.

        Im not sure what you are arguing here.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Thu Oct 10, 2013 at 10:26:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Huh? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY
          US Laws, rights and punishments, do not apply to non-US citizens any more than EU Rights can be legally claimed by US citizens.
          Of course EU rights can be legally claimed by US citizens in EU courts. And this is the case in most countries of the world. I find it disturbing that the (wrong) notion of non-US citizens not having rights seems to become more and more widespread.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site