4 ms·
Yeah but it's largely a non-issue. Also while people in the US who are here illegally may be permitted due process, it'll be a pretty easy case. Are you a US c
by muninn_ 10y ago
Yeah but it's largely a non-issue.
Also while people in the US who are here illegally may be permitted due process, it'll be a pretty easy case. Are you a US citizen? Yes? No? Pretty simple. I guess you could argue that the state has to provide evidence that you're not, but if the evidence doesn't exist you're asking the state to prove something exists that doesn't, which is a non sequitor.
- mikeash 10y agoPeople getting charged with murders they didn't commit is largely a non-issue, but that doesn't mean we should just bypass the whole trial thing. I don't understand your last part. If the state can't prove something exists that doesn't, then the state can't prove its case, so the accused should go free, no? We don't change the rules of legal proof just because it's inconvenient to the state.
- muninn_ 10y agoSo all I have to do is show up in a country and just say "I'm a citizen" and if they can't disprove that claim then I get to stay? Because that's essentially what you're saying here.
- mikeash 10y agoWell no, you're the one who said it's impossible to prove lack of citizenship, not me. I'm guessing that ICE is generally able to demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, that most illegal immigrants are not citizens. Most can be fairly easily proven not to have had US citizenship from birth (due to being born outside the US to non-American parents), and there is a central database of naturalized citizens, so if they are also absent from that, done. What I'm saying here is simply that if it is indeed impossible to prove, as you say, that is not a good reason to relax standards of proof.