Is barring Muslims from entering the US really unconstitutional?
>>81124900
Yes it is.
>>81124900
no, but banning Muslims already in the country from practicing their religion is.
It's unconstitutional to allow people to live in our nation when they seek to destroy us
Deport them all, or execute the all desu senpai
Also,
Checkem'
>>81124900
constitution applies to US citizens you faggot. stop repeating liberal bullshit and use your fucking brain.
>>81124900
Yes. And that's why the Constitution should be amended, because the founding fathers didn't take death cults into consideration as religions
It doesn't matter because i feel we can be almost certain the law wont be "NO KEBAB". It will surely be a block on immigration from particular high risk countries and countries funding terrorists
>>81124900
>>81124900
no
but it's incredibly stupid and unpractical
people who think this is a good idea should be banned from electoral process
>>81124900
No.
Try Google. It's been done before. It's legal to round up all Muslims and put them in FEMA camps.
We did it to the Japanese during ww2.
Try paying attention in school, kid.
It probably is.
However, it's probably not unconstitutional to place a temporary ban from specific countries.
No, the US is a Christian nation so they can ban Muslims if they want.
>>81125096
This. Thread over.
>>81125305
we did it to the chinese for like 60 years because they worked for beans and didn't want to commit to being american. we can do it again easily
Constitutional rights do not apply to foreigners, especially those residing outside the United States.
The federal government has the constitutional ability to be as hard or soft as it wants when it comes to immigration standards.
>>81125096
>banning Muslims already in the country from practicing their religion is.
You can't ban muslims from practising their religion if they all suffered "unfortunate accidents".
>>81124900
I don't understand why people think the Constitution and rights for American's apply to those who aren't American Citizens... like wew lad
>>81125389
in skool they forcefed me propaganda about how the japanese interment camps were unconstitutional
>>81125064
No, it isn't. See: >>81125212.
The Constitution only applies to citizens. The 1798 Aliens and Seditions Act, now translated legally thru as the "Alien Enemies Act" sets a legal precedence for the removal of such actors.
The problem with AEA is that it cannot supersede the constitution, but it's clear throughout Obama's terms that the constitution can take a back-seat if the president wills it.
50 U.S. Code ยง 21 reads as follows:
>Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety.
This would necessitate stripping people of their citizenship, which is an entirely different can of worms.
The claims would have to explain judicially and legally how muslims are not technically citizens but illegal aliens/actors of another state, i.e. ISIS. That one is much easier to argue.
Non-citizens don't apply.
>>81125096
So it would be unconstitutional for you to ban people from flying planes into buildings?
>>81125814
there's an jap-canadian environmentalist (extremist) who was host to a nature show (Canadian version of Attenborough) and has been busy churning out propaganda about our evil-doing of climate change. He also got in a public spat over the phone with WEEDMAN where the guy (David Suzuki) screamed at him and called him an asshole.
He was in an internment camp here in Canada. I can't help but wonder if he purposefully pushes all this anti-business, anti-Canadian crap b/c he's angry at us and wants payback.
Oh well. We were at war and couldn't trust these people. All is fair in love and war.
it is allowed but if you do it as described, they would just lie about to infiltrate as condoned by islam.
>>81124900
No. Any immigrant or any class of immigrant can be banned from entering the USA for as long as the President sees fit.
Deporting people who hold a particular ideology however is strictly unconstitutional. So yes Newt's statements were a bit too overboard, I'll call it a calculated overreaction on his part to appeal to Trump and his base but unfortunately for him that does more damage to his reputation for people like me who have even a basic understanding of the authority of the President and the words of the Constitution.
>>81124900
JIMMY MOTHER FUCKIN CARTER
>>81126189
the biggest complaint they could come up with about Manzanar (the camp in la sierra nevada, california) is that it was cold at night
they were well fed and manzanar was basically just a town they couldn't leave
>>81126189
>>81126594
Manzanar literally means apple orchard
But somehow they argue that it was a concentration camp
