2 ms·
>As in the preamble: "We the People of the United States." The preamble is discussing who is creating the constitution and why. It does not say it only applies
by boomboomsubban 6y ago
>As in the preamble: "We the People of the United States."
The preamble is discussing who is creating the constitution and why. It does not say it only applies to certain individuals. I don't see how you can use that to argue that the government is free to infringe upon the rights of noncitizens.
- rayiner 6y agoAs a grammatical matter, the phrase “the people” must refer to an antecedent. Even standing alone, “the people” clearly refers to certain people, not “all people.” The term isn’t read as applying only to citizens, because certain provisions of the constitution specifically require citizenship. It encompasses citizens and non-citizen residents, and to some extent people present on US soil. But it’s hard to read “the people” to mean “people in other countries.”
- boomboomsubban 6y ago>But it’s hard to read “the people” to mean “people in other countries.” The Constitution makes it clear that these rights are universal by saying that the government may not make laws that infringe upon them. They aren't granting rights, they are declaring which rights they must abide by. And with that, the use of "the people" in the part about free assembly should rely more on the context there then the preamble, where it clearly means "the people assembling" not "the citizens assembling." Further on your "persons" point, the relevant Fourth Amendment makes it clear the terms are interchangeable. >The right of the people to be secure in their persons...