Comment by willmarch
3 months ago
What state policies are you referring to? Laws/rights should apply equally to all people or else they are not really rights (are they?).
No, Enlightenment principles come from the idea that rights and laws belong to all people (citizen or otherwise) and the founders believed that to be "self-evident" and "unalienable" to all humans. The US Supreme Court has ruled as such again and again (non-citizens have protections of the US Constitution), and Enlightenment thinkers (and any decent person) would agree.
Your entire argument (and everything after) can be ignored because your premise is not just flawed, it is entirely incorrect (false) and goes against any principle of human rights that I'm aware of.
States are not the creations of the enlightment
I'll await your grant of medicare to the population of africa
Are you saying the population in Africa should not be provided healthcare? I fail to see your point here. If your argument is economic scarcity, then that can be solved eventually (and should be).
If citizenship isnt a line between two classes of people to which states owe obligations, then why isnt the USA obligated to pay for the healthcare of everyone in the world?
Why does medicare/medicaid end at the US border?
7 replies →
Recent Supreme Court decisions are nowhere near your position. They have given the President a lot of leeway to deport non-citizens. If everyone geographically in the country had equal standing, this would not be possible.
The keyword in your comment being "recent".
The Supreme Court historically matches my argument (which is all that matters). The recent controversial rulings do not negate that the US has for hundreds of years extended the protections of the US Constitution to all peoples that are on US soil (including non-citizens).
It was only very recently that the Supreme Court acknowledged the protections of the US Constitution to all the people born here.