Illegals Now Get Second Amendment Rights


The three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit decided that they were wiser than the three previous federal appeals court decisions, which they said were wrong on the Second Amendment and how it applies to illegal aliens.

The Seventh Circuit noted that three other federal appeals courts have said that illegal aliens do not have Second Amendment rights, but concluded that those courts were wrong, creating what lawyers call a “circuit split” by holding that § 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional.

The Second Amendment provides the citizens of the United States, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”   The Founders, as demonstrated in the Declaration of Independence, saw the necessity for people to be able throw off a tyrannic government.

 When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The Second Amendment is the necessary right to protect the “people”, the very citizens who have submitted themselves under the Constitution of the United States.   The Seventh Circuit courts interpretation of “people” greatly differs from previous rulings.

For example, in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, the High Court held that “the people” in the Bill of Rights includes only noncitizens who have “developed a sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of [the national] community,” such as permanent legal residents. The Court specifically contrasted the foreigner in that case from illegal aliens, saying that legal residents such as Mr. Verdugo-Urquidez “were in the United States voluntarily and had accepted some societal obligations.”

The Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence are only legitimate because the people consent to be governed by these laws.  An illegal alien, by virtue of ignoring the law of the land, has demonstrated his lack of consent and therefore should not be given the protection of the laws of the land for which he as deliberately ignored and broken.

Ken Klukowski writes:

In conclusion, the Seventh Circuit’s decision is disturbing for two reasons. One, it diminishes the value of American citizenship and muddies the water in multiple areas of law and public policy by ignoring the vital distinction the Constitution makes between adult American citizens as opposed to foreigners (especially illegal aliens). And second, it degrades the Second Amendment into a right that can be regulated far more heavily—and thus carries much less force—than other fundamental rights.

Read more at Breitbart.



Share

198 Comments

  1. Laura

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest