| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Land of the Free |
| Fifth Circuit Affirms Illegal Aliens Do Not Have Second Amendment Rights |
| 2024-08-29 |
| [Breitbart] A three-judge panel for the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed Tuesday illegal aliens do not have Second Amendment rights. They did so by pointing to United States v. Portillo-Munoz, “which prohibits an illegal alien from possessing a firearm or ammunition.” This prohibition was challenged by Defendant-Appellant Jose Paz Medina-Cantu, who was arrested July 13, 2022, for ” possession of a firearm and ammunition as an illegal alien…and illegal reentry into the United States.” Medina-Cantu argued that the firearm charges should be dismissed in light of Bruen (2022), but the Fifth Circuit explained that Bruen did not alter the prohibition contained in Portillo-Munoz. The three-judge panel noted, “Portillo-Munoz… is constitutional under the Second Amendment, reasoning that the phrase ‘the people’ in the Second Amendment does not include aliens unlawfully present in the United States.” They also noted Rahimi (2024) did not remove Portillo-Munoz’s prohibition against illegal aliens possessing firearms. Breitbart News pointed to a July 31, 2024, supplemental letter brief in which the U.S. Government contended that “illegal aliens” do not have Second Amendment rights. The supplemental letter brief was submitted in response to a “directive to address the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Rahimi (2024).” In the July 31, 2024, supplemental letter brief submitted by the DOJ, the U.S. Government contends that the prohibitions related to “illegal aliens” and firearms, contained in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(A), remain constitutional: The U.S. Government observed: “Nothing in Rahimi undermines this Court’s reasoning. To the contrary, the Supreme Court in Rahimi emphasized what its prior precedents observed: the Second Amendment extends to ‘ordinary citizens.’” |
| Posted by:Skidmark |
| #4 Taking that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion.... if you do not have expectation of the rights of citizens, then you have no need of a court hearing before your deportation, since you have no right to be adjudged! Backlog solved, illegal means you leave, PERIOD! Front door only, and ask permission, pass a background check and bring KSA's of value to our nation when you apply! Oh and if you tried to gt in illegally, end of the very long line. If you are already deported and caught again....NEVER even a visit. |
| Posted by: NoMoreBS 2024-08-29 14:32 |
| #3 Foreign invaders have no rights. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2024-08-29 10:16 |
| #2 10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2024-08-29 06:58 |
| #1 Given the US Bill Of Rights is a ALL OR NOTHING situation in thre courts and how the DOJ pretends to abide by. Has the 5TH just bascially ruled ILLEGALS - DO NOT HAVE - protection afforded by other Bill Of Rights Protections or status. NO Right: Of Freedom of movement, to Protest, to Petition, to Assembly, . NO Right: Have or carry a weapon. NO Miranda rights NO Rights covering Search and arrest. NO Rights in courts or to a fair trial. NO Right to sue and start a civil case. NO Right to Bail, fines, punishment. IF YES!!!!! Deportation just got easy. As their deportation should NOT require a court hearing either. NOW the next question. Does the 5TH ruling also affect VISA Immigrants? |
| Posted by: NN2N1 2024-08-29 06:24 |