Lily
Site Supporter
- Reaction score
- 21,496
- Location
- California
They were whether you like it or not.
Flynn-Flam has got shit for brains.
They were whether you like it or not.
Prove it by posting a link contradicting me.
AI Overview
Several Supreme Court cases have established that "illegal" or undocumented aliens are entitled to due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. These rights apply within the U.S. borders, regardless of immigration status, and protect individuals from arbitrary or unjust treatment by the government. While the extent of due process can vary depending on the situation, core principles of fairness and the opportunity to be heard are guaranteed.
Here's a breakdown of key cases and principles:
- Reno v. Flores (1993):
Justice Antonin Scalia, in this case, stated that "it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles [immigrants] to due process of law".
- Mathews v. Diaz (1976):
The Supreme Court recognized that even those with unlawful or transitory presence are entitled to constitutional protection, according to LII.
- Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei (1953):
This case clarified that aliens who have entered the country, even illegally, are entitled to due process protections in deportation proceedings, according to LII.
- Plyler v. Doe (1982):
While not directly about due process, this case established that states cannot deny undocumented children access to free public education, illustrating the principle that undocumented individuals are entitled to certain protections.
Flynn-Flam has got shit for brains.
Show me where the 4th Amendment is cited in all that garbage?
I'm not chasing your retardation.
You are wrong.
Says the cow that doesn't know remedial history.
I'm not chasing your retardation.
You are wrong.
Show them on a map to me. Be specific, especially for the nomadic tribes, like the plains Indians.
Show me where in your A.I. searched answer it mentions the 4th Amendment?
So you think the nomadic tribes just nomaded where their nomadic hearts took them?
![]()
I haven't cited the 4th amendment. None of us, as far as I know, are attorneys here.
Due process isn't only addressed by the 4th amendment. The 14th is the catch-all amendment regarding due process.
Stop arguing things you know nothing about.
I know it better than you. For today that is more than enough.
That's because the 4th Amendment was never cited in your A.I. generated response.
That's what myself and Hollidud were talking about. Sorry if you made this about you again.
...(bigbigeyeroll smiley) anyway, speaking of Incredible String Band,Many of them are. Do you deny this?
Yes, I do, Holliday. I am, after all, the Great and Incomparable Reggie and you, simply, are not.
Must suck to not be Reggie.
It doesn't and I didn't say it did.
Which is why you're still posting to me, right?
Unless they were stopped by territorial disputes.
But those wars were not fought in courts, moron.
Exactly.
Unless they were stopped by territorial disputes.
But those wars were not fought in courts, moron.
Territorial disputes settled in battle is the OG court, fuckwit beaner tubby loser.
How are the 5th and 14th amendments about me?
No, they're not courts, moron
legal systems were created to decrease wars, fuck face
The natives had their own government and laws. You should know this being the self professed smart person you claim to be.
As you're still posting to me.
They're definitely not the 4th Amendment.
You make everything about you. Always have. always will.
You stupid ass.Show me where the 4th Amendment is cited in all that garbage?
Yea, but I'm not the one saying I was done, only to contradict yourself. But this is just more of your predictable behavior as usual.
You do, apparently.![]()