The American Civil Liberties Union said Wednesday: "Under the proposed legislation, legal and non-legal immigrants alike would be denied a hearing or any way to contest the accusations against them. This is an unprecedented move inconsistent with the pledge of our leaders not to respond to the terrorist attacks in a way that degrades our system of justice

If the ACLU is against it, well then....

I don't see any protections for aliens and especially illegal aliens IN our Constitution. Extending Constitutional rights to aliens has always been an option, not an obligation. I believe that the reduction of Constitutional rights for citizens will require a Constitutional amendment by definition.

You're quite right. But the courts have mandated it. Remember, the Constitution is a 'living', 'breathing' document that the courts should and can contort and distort of their own accord. /sarcasm

As someone married to a citizen of UK who resides legally in the U.S. I have to tell you that I believe this is an outrage.

1. I fail to see how any harm comes to the government in having to hold someone for a few days in detention and argue before a judge its reasons for deportation. My family would suffer if she were just picked up and deported without any due process or reason expressed.

2. Surely if you have a terrorist the remedy is to detain, charge, and jail them, not deport them, just to have them reappear, illegally again some time in the future.

3. Why do you want to hand over this kind of unchecked power to a bureaucrat. What is to stop them from deporting, without due process, a U.S. citizen. "Oh, we made a mistake. He wasn't carrying any papers and we had this tip he was a terrorist." What is to stop said bureaucrat from abusing the discretion granted under this.

Get a clue. I don't even believe it is Constitutional - you know, life liberty property and due process.

Beware of those in power who want to take away your freedom...

As quickly as possible...

Don't think for a second that "it can't happen here"...

How can you believe that a "reduction of rights for citizens will require a constitutional amendment"? Our rights have been eroded by legislation alone for decades. Every federal gun law on the books is unconstitutional as are the RICO statutes and the assets forfeiture laws.

This is bad news indeed, especially coming from a President who claimed that "freedom has been attacked and freedom will be defended".

We're on the same side here. They have done it to us in the past, we can't let them do it again.
IF WE ARE TO GIVE UP CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, THEY MUST MODIFY THE CONSTITUTION.
The next thing we're going to hear is: Oh, never mind, those weren't really constitutional rights.

the question posed to me this week, after many emotions and long, steady thought about the unfolding events, forced me to ask who benefits most from what is transpiring. it is fascists in our own government that benefit most. this is the 'end game' that has been in the works for decades to effectively strip all privacy from americans, while supposedly giving back increased security. this knee-jerk reaction of stuffing carnivore, echelon, etc. into all our lives is the beginning of the end of america, officially, as we have known it. i guess the *terrorists* and the architects of the *new world order* win?

Thanks ratcat

Yes, I see what you're saying. Since we were posting yesterday, the President has created a cabinet post for Tommyboy Ridge. I think we need to let the President in on what we've been talking about. He seems to be surrounded by idiots who are whispering nonsense into his ear.

You and I both know that, for any citizens rights or state powers to be suppressed by legislation, the Constitution has to be amended. Unfortunately, all three branches of the federal government now ignore that fact and do as they please, hampered only by their political opponents in Congress and the news media.

amen.