News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amendment Rights. Parent comment

Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by Symmetry on Friday January 24, 2020 @07:57AM (#22137703)
"Citizen" is never mentioned in the Bill of Rights. It's all "The Government shall make no law" or "the people" or "the accused" which apply equally to any other person within the United States. Even undocumented immigrants are protected by the Bill of Rights and legal non-citizen residents certainly are.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by ReptileMan on Friday January 24, 2020 @08:06AM (#22137773)
The question is whether the Bill of Rights ends at US border from what I understand.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by noarchy on Friday January 24, 2020 @09:42AM (#22138658)
Heck, there is a question about whether the Bill of Rights even makes it to the border, given the existence of border checkpoints as much as 100 miles from said border.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by bumby on Friday January 24, 2020 @08:34AM (#22138023)
I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. I think the issue is whether those rights apply to non-citizens outside the border.

I think it’s generally well established that rights travel abroad with citizens. However, it’s less clear if they apply abroad (or even to U.S. territories) to non-citizens. E.g. United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez claims it does not apply to non-citizens who do not have a voluntary association with the U.S.

Edit: I'll try to be more clear. The rights of U.S. citizens extend beyond the border when dealing with the U.S. government. I was not implying other governments must recognize U.S. Constitutional rights when dealing with U.S. citizens.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by ameister14 on Friday January 24, 2020 @09:58AM (#22138785)
Interestingly enough, the phrasing in the article implies that the Justice Department is arguing that speech made outside the US is not protected, not simply speech made by non-citizens.

I would be incredibly surprised if that argument held up.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by bumby on Friday January 24, 2020 @10:46AM (#22139216)
See Anwar al-Awlaki for some evidence of how the US applies constitutional rights to citizens abroad when they are considered enemies of the state
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by ameister14 on Friday January 24, 2020 @12:20PM (#22140315)
Was that legally supported? I think it just wasn't challenged
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by bumby on Friday January 24, 2020 @02:48PM (#22141791)
ACLU challenged with multiple cases. As far as I know they were dismissed

https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-obama-constitutional-...

https://www.aclu.org/cases/al-aulaqi-v-panetta-constitutiona...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by flyingfences on Friday January 24, 2020 @08:31AM (#22137992)
Well, one might expect the exercised powers of the US government to end at the US border...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by ceejayoz on Friday January 24, 2020 @08:35AM (#22138031)
I think /u/ReptileMan is talking more about situations like border crossings, where the Border Patrol claims some rights don't apply because you haven't been granted entry yet, even though you're technically on US soil.

There are also questions about scenarios like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki, where a US citizen was executed by the US without trial while overseas.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amen... by bumby on Friday January 24, 2020 @08:22AM (#22137898)
No disagreement here. I should have used “person” rather than citizen. I made the distinction in my other comment
[ Parent | on HN ]