• dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is not a new idea in Conservative circles. I remember having debates wih people 30 years ago, who voted for goobers like Bob Dole, George Pataki and Al D’Amato, who insisted that the rights in the Bill of Rights only applied to citizens, and foreigners in our country had no rights whatsoever.

    And since Trump has decided that Omar’s citizenship application is fraudulent, in his mind she never was a citizen, so is subject to the same treatment.

    You see? It makes total sense, if you’re a xenophobic moron!

    • Kirp123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      "The right of the people to be… "

      “No person shall be held to answer…”

      “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall…”

      And so on.

      I don’t see a single mention of citizen in there, only the people, person, the accused which are words that can refer to anyone citizen or not.

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      The idea of non-citizens having different rights (not none, but a very different set) is pretty well-established. But the courts have also long upheld that it’s all or nothing. Once you become a citizen, you have all of those rights. If you renounce, you lose them all. There is very little wiggle room on the subject.

      Trump decided she wasn’t a citizen long before there was any question of fraud. That happened the moment she refused to kneel to him. The rest is just about how he can reach his goal of destroying anyone that would challenge him.