Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2026, 05:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2026, 11:11 AM - Edit history (1)

As to whom it applies, that would be "the people" (just like in the 2nd Amend.), which doesn't seem to have a clear, universally accepted definition in case law. CJ Rehnquist, in Verdugo-Urquidez, gave what's to closest to a universal definition, but I think there's some dispute as to whether or not that's binding or only dicta. In any case, different Circuits have interpreted the phrase differently for various Constitutional rights.

Perhaps one of our Constitutional law experts might weigh in.

says it can apply to anyone suspected of being an immigrant.

...of the Ten Commandments that they want plastered on the walls of every public school classroom in the same way they pick apart the very simple language of the U.S. Constitution in order to take away people's rights.

You just thought you knew what "thou" and "adultery" meant....

But as we know, "Christians" do this on the fly every day--although they don't have to work too hard. Adultery, for example, was limited to something only a married woman could do in much of the ancient world--therefore, Orange Jesus isn't an adulterer; problem solved....

Superseded by Dubya's Patriot Act...along with the sixth, eighth and ninth (and probably a few more).

...the Constitution is"just a piece of paper!" Which is every Republican's excuse whenever the Constitution thwarts their Machiavellian machinations. "Laws are for thee, not for me!"
There are not words to describe how deeply I despise those people.

That Bush quote reminds me of a scene in Harold Ramis' 1986 comedy Club Paradise - where Robin Williams plays an injured fireman who uses his insurance payout to settle in a fictitious Caribbean banana republic.

Before long, the outspoken fireman finds himself targeted by the local despot - and in jail. "What about the law?" his naive girlfriend (played by Twiggy) asks.

"The law? In this country, the constitution is written in pencil."

That's us now, incredibly.

They say it was largely the brainchild of a South Vietnamese RW extremist called Viet Dinh - who was brought into the Bush regime on day one.

Dinh largely patterned the Patriot Act, it's alleged, after the (very 3rd world-style) states of siege that prevailed in his former narco-state until its defeat in 1975.

He also had a lot of input from John Birch types - so you can imagine.

It has become really lawless and when things get this bad it is likelier that serious legal pushback starts.
I am rooting for that.

and make it subject to interpretation. And whoever is in power then gets to use their interpretation as they see fit. It always seems when challenged they don't seek to rule in whether the interpretation is valid, just whether they have the authority to do it. Currently if they are Republicans they do, and if they are Democrats they don't.

"NOW GET FACE DOWN ON THE GROUND WITH YOUR HANDS OUT!!"