do illegal aliens have 2nd amendment rights?

[dead0man]

**PDF**
Frank's favorite website

In a decision earlier this month in U.S. v. Carbajal-Flores from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman concluded that you can't always and under every circumstance prohibit people in the country illegally from legally possessing weapons.

The factual background of the prosecution of Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, as explained in Judge Coleman's decision: "On June 1, 2020, Carbajal-Flores possessed a handgun in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago, Illinois. Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun for self-protection and protection of property. Because of Carbajal-Flores' citizenship status, he was charged with violating of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which prohibits any noncitizen who is not legally authorized to be in the United States from 'possess[ing] in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.'"

Judge Coleman granted a motion to dismiss the charges against Carbajal-Flores, by declaring that such a blanket prohibition against weapons possession for a category of people can't withstand scrutiny under current Second Amendment doctrine.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

What definition of "Second Amendment rights" are you asking this about?

The whacked right-wingnut "every living being has a right to take their light artillery grocery shopping"? Or the much saner, "Congress can't stop the states from having their own organized bodies of people under arms"? 

[dead0man]

What definition of "Second Amendment rights" are you asking this about?

The whacked right-wingnut "every living being has a right to take their light artillery grocery shopping"? Or the much saner, "Congress can't stop the states from having their own organized bodies of people under arms"? 

the ones non-illegals live under, and you know this

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

What definition of "Second Amendment rights" are you asking this about?

The whacked right-wingnut "every living being has a right to take their light artillery grocery shopping"? Or the much saner, "Congress can't stop the states from having their own organized bodies of people under arms"? 

the ones non-illegals live under, and you know this

I don't think interpretations of the 2nd Amendment are settled, nor that some recent judgements are in accordance with the letter or spirit of the 2nd Amendement. But if your question is just "Does the Constitution apply to people who entered or reside in the United States in violation of the law" then the only sane answer is "yes". Once you start deciding that certain classes of people don't have the proection of the law because they are, to paraphrase Orwell, "less equal", you're actively moving  away from rule of law.

[AGA]

Not a constitutional scholar, so I'm not sure, but clearly illegal immigrants have some constitutional rights. I don't think a law restricting their speech would withstand court scrutiny, so why wouldn't the 2nd Amendment apply to them?

[Ferguson97]

Undocumented immigrants obviously have some constitutional rights. As much as I despise the 2nd amendment, there is no moral or rational justification for depriving them of such rights.

[Yelnoc]

Interesting question, I'd love for one of our residents lawyers to weigh in. I guess I always assumed that undocumented immigrants had more restricted rights, but I'm realizing I do not have any basis for that belief.

Dead0man, do you think the government be able to quarter troops in an undocumented person's residence? Or compel an undocumented immigrants to testify in court (fifth amendment)? I genuinely don't know how those amendments would work either.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Undocumented immigrants obviously have some constitutional rights. As much as I despise the 2nd amendment, there is no moral or rational justification for depriving them of such rights.

There's nothing wrong with the 2nd Amendment - the problem is largely with the modern political right, which pretends it creates an unregulateable and constitutionally protected market for individuals to purchase military weapons and semi-automatic pistols, and the ammosexual culture that goes along with said market.

Article I, Section  8, Power of Congress

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

It was obvious upon review that these clauses would allow a Congress acting in bad faith and tyrannical aim, to exercise its authority over the Militia to effectively destroy said Militia, or at least render it utterly unable to act as a Militia, by depriving it of arms... exactly as the British forces had tried to do to Colonial Militia at the start of the Revolution.

That in turn leads us to the Second Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The 2nd establishes that while Congress has a degree of control over the various State Militia, it cannot use that power to dissolve the Militia, nor to disarm them.

The United States had reasonable and effective gun regulation for over a century and a half, until the intersection of the gun industry and nascent right-wing power fantasies saw they could leverage the 2nd in bad faith to create a vast and profitable market of wanna-be Red Dawn LARPers.

In a sane world, the 2nd Amendment would be irrelevant to undocumented immigrants - unless various States chose to allow non-citizens into their Militia (which is an entirely different discussion), and then only tangentially.

In our world, I expect we're looking at some future (if not current) argument along the lines of "We can't let non-citizens have guns! So some Americans must be more equal than other Americans, because <bought and paid-for Supreme Court "Justices" mumble-mumble>. Now that we've established that vital precedent, we can go on to ignore the Bill of Rights when it comes to anyone without an (R) after their name." (One of the right's favorite power-fantasies is stripping citizenship from people they don't like.)

[PSOL]

Should I even give my response in this thread?

[Big Abraham]

Anyone on American soil is entitled to the liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Do illegal aliens not have the right to free speech? If an illegal immigrant is accused of a crime, is he not entitled to due process? I suppose next we should ask whether or not they are also subject to the Geneva conventions. Stupid question

[dead0man]

Should I even give my response in this thread?

only if you can do it without pointlessly insulting anyone...and since I see you recommended Big Asshole's post above, probably not.

[SWE]

The Constitution is very clear as to what provisions apply to only citizens and what provisions apply to all persons within the US's jurisdiction. The Second Amendment very unambiguously falls into the latter category. There's quite a bit of debate as to exactly where the contours of the Second Amendment lie, but whether or not citizenship status is a relevant consideration to Second Amendment analysis is well outside that debate.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

They have the same rights to firearms that everyone else have.

The Bill of Rights addresses "the people" and "persons".

Now they don't have the right to be here, and if they're previously deported felons, they don't have the right to bear arms. 

[Santander]

Obviously not, and neither do legal aliens without a green card.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

It feels like a moot point if a background check is required.

[Frodo]

No. 

[Meclazine for Israel]

Should I even give my response in this thread?

What's the worse thing that could happen?

You could get banned?

[MarkD]

If it were up to me rather than being up to the Supreme Dictators of the United States, I would say "yes," even illegal aliens have 2nd Amendment rights.

[certified hummus supporter 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

I'm sure Martians couldn't care less for the Second Amendment tbh

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

I'm sure Martians couldn't care less for the Second Amendment tbh

This.

I think the aliens will do whatever they want.