Donald Trump and our Apparently Disposable Constitutional Amendments
As the Bill of Rights which accompanies and elaborates upon the United States Constitution stands, it is a pretty darned good Bill of Rights. Not flawless, not sacrosanct, not uncontroversial, but a hell of a roadmap to a free society nonetheless.
We apologize for the unusually editorial voice of this entry. We haven’t had our coffee yet.
Amendments can a bit more esoteric, particularly past the Bill’s initial 10, but those 10 especially still provide solid concepts worthy of being well defined, and frequently revisited.
The 2nd amendment causes some noise, but generally people are cool with these:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
We won’t break down all 27 amendments here — as no one is coming to PeekYou for THAT analysis — but for Goodness’ sake go to WikiPedia and look it up. It’s important stuff to know.
But the focus here is on the handy-dandy 14th Amendment and the incessant braying of our — now let this sink in — current presidential frontrunner.
It would take too long to recap it all in this space, and shame on you for not having followed it up until now.
The Donald — the man who is the current front-runner for PRESISDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (just letting that be known again) — clashed with popular Fox News juggernaut Bill O’Reilly on Tuesday night over the part of Trump’s controversial and highly incoherent and incomprehensible immigration plan that would take away citizenship from children who were born in the United States but whose parents came to the country illegally.
This very protection — this guarantee of citizenship to all born here — is our 14th Amendment. And many consider it a cornerstone to what makes us awesome. O’Reilly admonished Trump explaining that mass deportations of so-called “birthright citizens” would be both a national tragedy and a national embarrassment.
Trump disagreed, as he will and clarified — in his unclear way — that “many lawyers are saying that’s not the way it is in terms of this.”
Trump’s “lawyer acquaintances downtown’ went on to explain, “What happens is, they’re in Mexico, they’re going to have a baby, they move over here for a couple of days, they have the baby,” Trump said, telling O’Reilly that these “lawyers” explained, “It’s not going to hold up in court, it’s going to have to be tested.”
“Regardless, when people are illegally in the country, they have to go. Now, the good ones — there are plenty of good ones — will work, so it’s expedited, we can expedite it where they come back in, but they come back legally,” Trump clarified.
But that Fourteenth Amendment to our United States Constitution? KAPUT, says Trump. He ain’t havin’ it. He worked for everything he earned in this life — including his countless failed business ventures and four personal bankruptcies — and sees no reason why 19-year old Javier — born and raised in the United States his whole life, not even speaking a word of Spanish — should be afforded the same opportunities.