Can't verify the truthiness of the story, but the US has become one hell of a paranoid state.
>No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Note how the early part specifies citizens, the latter part specifies persons. At border control a person is in jurisdiction of the USA legal system and so, according to the literal text deserves equal protection of the law.
I'm aware the established interpretation differs, however, the writer of the amendment clearly meant to extend the rights and protections to all IMO.
There's still due process to consider at the border, but applying border controls is pretty well established as due process.
True, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly decided that the 5th amendment imposes both due process and equal protection requirements on the federal govt, just as the 14th imposes them on the states. E.g., see Lawrence v. Texas.
> "...applying border controls is pretty well established as due process."
This is a pretty vague statement, but it not really true in any sense. The constitutionality of our current border control practices is still being vigorously litigated.
However you seem a bit confused. You started talking about due process, but now you appear to be shifting the goalposts to 4th amendment issues.
Your statement, "applying border controls is pretty well established as due process", doesn't really make sense. Due process is only one of the many thorny issues that embroil the border search exception, and the exception's constitutionality along due process lines has not been decided by the supreme court one way or the other. Perhaps I should ask you, how did you arrive at "pretty well established"? Can you provide a bit of case history?
My other response was a somewhat sarcastic reply to The constitutionality of our current border control practices is still being vigorously litigated.. It's the details that are being litigated, not the overall detention and search of foreign nationals.
Border controls wouldn't be wrong, it would be if you did unlawful searches and such that would be wrong.
Out of curiosity what legal move makes the State not obliged to prosecute the Federal government under this amendment for breaking the State law? States wouldn't be able to ratify it (it seems to me: otherwise they'd be making laws allowing unequal treatment of persons), so it must be pretty early and high-level - presumably there's a blanket Feds can do as they please (wrt state laws) that makes this possible?
/sarcasm
I'd find it hard to argue.
Americans knowledge of geography could certainly be improved. I don't think it means anything negative about the people though.
Celebrating ignorance is one reason we have the current administration and Congress.
Ordinary citizens do not vote on issues affecting an individual country. I'm sorry, you're just going to have to accept the fact that not all Americans are well educated.
Putting nuclear weapons at the finger tips of someone is a big responsibility.
>Ordinary citizens do not vote on issues affecting an individual country.
They vote on representatives that tend to have a policies that might. See for example those running on platforms on building border walls, kicking out immigrants, banning people from other nations from entering them, pulling out of climate change agreements, etc.
>I'm sorry, you're just going to have to accept the fact that not all Americans are well educated.
I accept that's the fact now. I don't accept that that should be a fact for the country's future.
I also accept that we should do better in Geography. That'd be swell.
When you have tweets like this [0] from politicians it gives the impression that people do actually think like that.
[0] https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/705171336381923328
Entry without a visa also represents a relaxation of policy that existed 30 years go (just 10 years for Hungary!):
Regardless of the truth of the particular story related, there are sufficiently many similar stories I've heard that this one rings true.
And it's hugely negative for the US and its reputation abroad.