A breath of judicial fresh air
Been a lot of higher court decisions on guns this year. Some have been good, some questionable, some downright bad (Maryland’s AR ban, I’m looking at you. I don’t care if God himself upheld you. By the bye, Maryland is going to the Supreme Court on that one – an appeal against the 4th Court order has already been filed.) Tuesday, though, the 5th Court made a different, RIGHT call.
Illegal migrants do not have the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court in New Orleans has ruled, rejecting arguments by a Mexican man who was convicted of illegally possessing a handgun and argued that the ban was unconstitutional.
Love how illegals are able to hide behind the Constitution… here’s a thought – how bout passing a law that Constitutional protections only apply to CITIZENS?
A three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that federal prohibitions on illegal immigrants owning firearms was lawful, and Second Amendment rights do not apply to those who have entered the country illegally.
The ruling came in an appeal by Jose Paz Medina-Cantu, who had been arrested by Border Patrol agents in Texas in 2022 and charged with illegally possessing a handgun and unlawfully re-entering the country after being previously deported.
Previously deported and trying to rattle our legal cage. Makes you wonder if it is slower to reviolate and re-enter illegally after being kneecapped? I, of course, would never advocate such a thing… publicly. Remember that Mission:Impossible movie in which a small explosive charge was inserted in someone’s sinuses? Maybe a triggering transmission would be along the border?
“The Second Amendment protects the right of ‘the people’ to keep and bear arms. Our court has held that the term ‘the people’ under the Second Amendment does not include illegal aliens,” U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, a conservative appointee of Republican President Trump, wrote in a concurring opinion.
“As to common sense, an illegal alien does not become ‘part of a national community’ by unlawfully entering it, any more than a thief becomes an owner of property by stealing it.”
“The Court has repeatedly explained that ‘an alien… does not become one of the people to whom these things are secured by our Constitution by an attempt to enter forbidden by law’… But that’s, of course, the very definition of an illegal alien – one who ‘attempts to enter’ our country in a manner ‘forbidden by law.’”
“So illegal aliens are not part of ‘the people’ entitled to the protections of the Second Amendment.’
Ho added that for an illegal alien to appeal to the Constitution is to concede that the United States is governed by that supreme law.
“And ‘the power to exclude [aliens from the United States] has been determined to exist’ under our Constitution. So, the Court concluded, ‘those who are excluded cannot assert the rights in general obtaining in a land to which they do not belong as citizens or otherwise,'” Ho wrote.
I know who I would think of first next time we need a Supreme Court justice.
Category: Guns
“As to common sense, an illegal alien does not become ‘part of a national community’ by unlawfully entering it, any more than a thief becomes an owner of property by stealing it.”
Well said! And so easy to comprehend that even an illegal alien invader should be able to.
Will need translations into Chinese, Arabic, Parsi, Spanish, Creole, etc.
Chinks would read it this way: 就常識而言，非法移民不會通過非法進入而成為‘國家共同體的一部分’，就像小偷不會通過偷竊財產而成為財產所有者一樣。
Purely a personal prejudice – while I have prejudiced of my own, it would help the look of the site not to use racial perjoratives which can distract from our core values. Thanks!
In Spanish: “En cuanto al sentido común, un extranjero ilegal no se convierte en ‘parte de una comunidad nacional’ al entrar ilegalmente en ella, como tampoco un ladrón se convierte en propietario de una propiedad al robarla.”
Seems that would apply to bunch of other aspects of the Constitution, like due process, search and seizure, and a whole host of other things they use to continuously subvert our nation and our laws..
And “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means illegal aliens’ kids don’t qualify for birthright citizenship– no more “anchor babies,” go home putos!
That would make a HUGE difference! It has long been an anchor around the neck of this nation, with little to no benefit.
I like that idea of an implanted explosive device triggered by RF.
Splodey heads. We can easily find just where the repeat offenders are around the country.
We could put that explosive rf device where the sun don’t shine as an alternative location. It may cause one to die slowly and painfully. But they are not protected by our constitution any how! Would be a great deterrent to see illegals running back to the border after one of them exploded. Land mines? Bouncing Betty? Wishful thinking🙂
You sound like a “Man on Fire.”
So that sinus thingy. Is it inserted with their full knowledge?
I don’t think it would be allowed because someone would forget to take it out, and be flying on a airplane when they cross the border, it would freak out the Karens!
I could think of another body cavity that it could be inserted in. And if they didn’t know the device would/could go all ‘splodey they may enjoy and want the insertion.
How many Karen’s would freak if they saw the header picture. Our Flag, A Copy of The Constitution, and an example of the works from HMS JMB (HBHN) all together? How sweet it is!
BZ Judge Ho!
That pic might just get framed and hung over the bar at the Cantina. Right next to my DD-214 and autographed picture of Richard Petty.
Well, they are coming into the country repeatedly and laughing at our protestations. Turn about being fair play and all that, we could laugh at them as well as we insert said device. Smile at the while explaining that any unauthorized removal will result in serious injury or death. A verbal warning label if you will.
Better yet, let’s go to DC and install on congressional critters. We would only need about 500 or so saving taxpayers a boat load of money while ensuring full participation in the floor vote.
A proper ruling based on law and plain old common sense. I’m sure the dems are going to hate it.
On the other side of that coin is the fact that the BoR also specifies that the right to vote is also held only by citizens of the nation, not just any old trespasser (ie illegal alien). To change that would require a constitutional amendment.
Will see what happens if Frau harris and her proposed 1000 year 4th Reich gets in . I wonder if now, I should start working out my right arm so I could give the Sig Heil salute if I get approached by any Schutzstaffel (FBI) agents but will have to watch how high I raise my right arm due to a past rotator cuff surgery.
Yessir! My repair was screwed by a demonic P T who raised my arm too high first day! She’s looking for a new job now! I’ve been advised to have additional surgery. 👀Duh?
Well, at least they can still vote.
Aristotle once said: “And it is a mark of a tyrant to have men of foreign extraction rather than citizens as guests at table and companions, feeling that citizens are hostile but strangers make no claim against him.”
There is a specific reason why the traitorous demoncrats want illegals in the police and the military and that is to use them against us when we finally decide to stand up to the tyrant in charge. Illegals will have no qualms for doing so whereas those who share our language, culture, beliefs, and values may think twice and consider disobeying the orders of a tyrant. The 5th Circuit just defanged this evil idea and that is a great thing.
Here’s a video on Aristotle’s views on tyrants that is pretty interesting and I think still applies today:
I’m confused. If someone is deported from a nation for illegal entry, then re-enters that nation and carries a weapon… how is this just considered a crime and not an invasion?
Welp, it is both when the illegal is part of 15 million other such invaders.
Poland has it right. live ammo to repel invaders.. When the bodies get deep enough, they’ll stop coming.. or take a page from Vlad the Impalers book.. heads on stakes across the border.. shoulds resolve the problem most riki tik..
J.P Medina-Cantu possessed a firearm and ammunition as an illegal alien, in violation of 18 USC 922(g)(5)(A) and 942(A), and illegal reentry into the U.S., violating 8 USC 1326(a) and (b), and was subsequently sentenced to 15 months in prison followed by 2 years of supervisory release, translates to him being a convicted felon, which means he certainly CAN’T own or possess a firearm.
Should be summarily executed as a non-uniformed combatant.
I have mentioned Bruen before as a poorly phrased decision, essentially saying “any 2A restrictions must be historically based”. That has led to a host of appeals, saying things like ” in the 17/1800s there were no restrictions based on felony records/being under 18/automatic weapons etc. so you cannot enforce them now.”