Are "undocumented immigrants" persons?

[Rich2018]

Okay?

The point was, it's the only experience I have with deportation (I met the guy a couple of times) and my understating is that he'll not be allowed back

Aliens admitted as F and J students (and their dependents) don't have a hard date as their term of admission, but instead are admitted for the duration of status, which means they can stay indefinitely as long as they satisfy courseload requirements.

That wasn't what was reported earlier this year:

"In September, the Homeland Security Department proposed a new rule limiting F or J student visas to a fixed four-year term, despite many study programs lasting longer than that.
The rule would limit student visas to a fixed two-year term if students were from a country with a visa overstay rate above 10% or on a U.S. State Department’s State Sponsor of Terrorism list..."

Foreign Students Look Forward to Visa Stability

International students whose studies and immigration status have undergone changes during President Donald Trump’s administration say they hope their stays will stabilize with President-elect Joe Biden

www.voanews.com

 

[Phys251]

Monday, 30th November, the case Trump v. New York will be argued before the Supreme Court.

The Court's decision in the case may or may not affect the 2020 elections. The Trump administration will be arguing that "undocumented immigrants" (illegal aliens) should not be considered "persons" for the purpose of congressional representation numbers. Trump has said, on more than one occasion that some states are over-represented in Congress due to the number of illegals in those states.



The 14th Amendment, Section 2 would appear to contradict Trump while supporting the idea that all humans/persons should be counted during the national census that takes place every 10 years. Although the Amendment does state that "Indians not taxed" were not to be counted. Native Americans did not become American citizens until the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, even after the passage of that Act some states refused to call Indians "citizens' if they lived on a designated reservation, until 1957.

Damn straight they are. Anyone who uses the word "illegal" as a noun to describe them is dehumanizing them.

Undocumented migrants shouldn't be counted towards representation numbers, however.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

The point was, it's the only experience I have with deportation (I met the guy a couple of times) and my understating is that he'll not be allowed back

It's entirely possible, based on the nature of his status. Also, even if a person isn't technically barred (whether they didn't accrue enough time out of status or have overcome the bar), their violation of status does invalidate any visa they previously held. They therefore must go to an embassy to apply for a new one. If they cannot convince the consular officer they are not an intending immigrant (an assumption that is required on the part of the consular officer), they do not get a visa. If he was living here unlawfully and had an established relationship with a US citizen, he is unlikely to overcome that assumption for some time.

That wasn't what was reported earlier this year:

"In September, the Homeland Security Department proposed a new rule limiting F or J student visas to a fixed four-year term, despite many study programs lasting longer than that.
The rule would limit student visas to a fixed two-year term if students were from a country with a visa overstay rate above 10% or on a U.S. State Department’s State Sponsor of Terrorism list..."

Foreign Students Look Forward to Visa Stability

International students whose studies and immigration status have undergone changes during President Donald Trump’s administration say they hope their stays will stabilize with President-elect Joe Biden

www.voanews.com

That's a new rule proposal, not a statement of the status quo. And it's not really as drastic as it sounds. All it means is a student can be admitted for a maximum of four years any time they make entry. The F and J classes of admission are the only ones with a duration of status period of admission, except diplomats (A visas), representatives of international organizations (G visas), and NATO representatives (NATO/N visas). Oh, and representatives of foreign media organizations (I visas). F and J visas are also plagued with fraud, unfortunately. This change would simply mean that aliens admitted as F and J nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors would have to reapply for admission or apply for an extension of stay every two or four years. This wouldn't be unique, as intra-company transferees (L visas) have petitions that may be valid for several years (and sometimes even indefinitely) but cannot be admitted for longer than three years at a time. This usually isn't a problem for them, since they make frequent trips out of the country and then return, getting a fresh three-year admission each time until the validity of their petition becomes less than that. Students are largely the same, as most make regular trips back home for the summer, or even to Mexico for Spring Break.

 

[jonny5]

Historically there were two very well known exceptions being diplomats and 'indians not taxed' both classes of individuals who were present but not considered a part of the political community. Of course the 'indians not taxed' are now US citizens, but the diplomat exception is itself very well known as well as other non-resident aliens who are physically present in the US but who don't count for Census or apportionment purposes, ie tourists and those present on B1/B2 visa (pretty sure those visa holders DON'T fill out Census form). Illegal aliens are present but not 'resident aliens' because they are obviously subject to deportation. No, non-resident aliens should NOT count and to the extent that they do, including those who are lawfully present (I believe H1B, L1, F1 fill out the Census form?), we are vesting political power in the US based, in part, on classes of individuals who are specifically excluded by statute from our political community.

Some might suggest the term free persons means everybody. But, here's the rub, if it really does include everybody, one needs to ask how ANYBODY is excluded. And yes, there ARE exclusions

Well said, but it more just demonstrates congresses negligence. They should have dealt with with all these illegal immigrant issues decades ago. Define persons, remove born on us soil citizenship, protect the border.

 

[Rich2018]

That's a new rule proposal, not a statement of the status quo. And it's not really as drastic as it sounds. All it means is a student can be admitted for a maximum of four years any time they make entry. The F and J classes of admission are the only ones with a duration of status period of admission, except diplomats (A visas), representatives of international organizations (G visas), and NATO representatives (NATO/N visas). Oh, and representatives of foreign media organizations (I visas). F and J visas are also plagued with fraud, unfortunately. This change would simply mean that aliens admitted as F and J nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors would have to reapply for admission or apply for an extension of stay every two or four years. This wouldn't be unique, as intra-company transferees (L visas) have petitions that may be valid for several years (and sometimes even indefinitely) but cannot be admitted for longer than three years at a time. This usually isn't a problem for them, since they make frequent trips out of the country and then return, getting a fresh three-year admission each time until the validity of their petition becomes less than that. Students are largely the same, as most make regular trips back home for the summer, or even to Mexico for Spring Break.

I suspect that he new Biden administration will take an entirely diferent view anyway.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

I suspect that he new Biden administration will take an entirely diferent view anyway.

That's possible, though I think it would be a mistake. For example, there is no reason at all why an exchange visitor (J visa) should automatically get a vague and indeterminate period of admission. This is especially true when, as is the case with J visas, thousands of teenagers come here for summer work/travel programs and then leave after four months. Why do they need a duration of status admission when there is a date certain by which they must depart? I would say the same thing for F students entering for English language programs, but a large portion of them are in those classes as a precursor to attending university so it's probably not feasible for that class of admission.

Bottom line, just because it was done under the presidency of The Orange Man that doesn't make it bad.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

So a state has to find 100% of all the resources required to upkeep its infrastructure ?

In a perfect world states should be doing that.

However in the current world I don’t think states should be getting federal infrastructure money based on illegal aliens they refuse to help deport and encourage to move there.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Why the hell not ?

Don't non-citizens go to US schools, get treated in hospitals, earn welfare benefits, drive on roads/bridges and live in homes that need street lighting, refuse collection and sewage treatment ?

Didn't the infant USA, when the Constitution was written, class 95% of the people living in it as "non citizens". Like blacks, Indians, women, and even white males without property ?

No, women and males without property were citizens, so were Indians who were not citizens of the United States but of their respective tribes.

The franchise is not a necessary component of citizenship. There is no moral right to vote, that is purely a political consideration.

 

[Rich2018]

That's possible, though I think it would be a mistake. For example, there is no reason at all why an exchange visitor (J visa) should automatically get a vague and indeterminate period of admission. This is especially true when, as is the case with J visas, thousands of teenagers come here for summer work/travel programs and then leave after four months. Why do they need a duration of status admission when there is a date certain by which they must depart? I would say the same thing for F students entering for English language programs, but a large portion of them are in those classes as a precursor to attending university so it's probably not feasible for that class of admission.

Bottom line, just because it was done under the presidency of The Orange Man that doesn't make it bad.

I think all visas should have an expiry date, by which the holder must leave or re-new

However, this COVID pandemic, should not cause visa holders to leave before the purpose for being here is attained (should that have been delayed by the pandemic).

 

[ecofarm]

Why we counting young uns and wimmins?

 

[Rich2018]

In a perfect world states should be doing that.

So you don't believe the federal government should give funding to one state by taxing another ?
No state should be a net beneficiary in your perfect world ?
Would that also apply to counties? With the state not spending more money there than it raised in tax?
In your view, should a rich man pay more tax than a poor man or should they all pay the same tax ?

Are you aware that "blue" states are (mostly) net contributors and "red" states are (mostly) net beneficiaries ?

No, women and males without property were citizens, so were Indians who were not citizens of the United States but of their respective tribes.

The franchise is not a necessary component of citizenship. There is no moral right to vote, that is purely a political consideration.

They might have been citizens but lacked full citizenship rights (basically they had the same status as a legal resident and non-citizen has today)
ie: They didn't have suffrage suffrage.

 

[pamak]

They are persons in the common parlance of term but in the legal context for representation they should not. They are representatives of the US citizenry, not of illegal immigrants. The part where it talks about non-taxed Native Americans gives plenty of standing not count them as they work under the table.

Yes, yes...I know some get fake SS numbers and pay some taxes but they don't pay them all and even their payments are done via fraud.

They are in the common parlance of term and in the legal context of the constitution as we have understood it for centuries when we count them in the census. The latter has included for centuries all sorts of persons, including persons who had limited citizen rights, such as women who for centuries could not vote. The idea is that the presence of such persons still creates obligations (and incurs cost) to US citizens. For example, the SCOTUS has ruled that kids of illegal immigrants have a right to publicly funded education.

Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)

Plyler v. Doe: A state cannot prevent children of undocumented immigrants from attending public school unless a substantial state interest is involved.

supreme.justia.com

Held: A Texas statute which withholds from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" into the United States, and which authorizes local school districts to deny enrollment to such children, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.


(a) The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause, which provides that no State shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term.

 

[dncc]

So are nonimmigrant visitors who are here for a week. Should they be counted in the census? Should prison inmates be counted in the location where they are incarcerated or the last place the lived before going to prison?

No on both counts.

Visitors are not here long term so representation and other determinations of federal funding would not be jeopardized.
Prison inmates are wards of the State and therefore are not considered part of the population.

 

[pamak]

No on both counts.

Visitors are not here long term so representation and other determinations of federal funding would not be jeopardized.
Prison inmates are wards of the State and therefore are not considered part of the population.

Nope!

See for example SCOTUS decision in my previous post.

 

[Rich2018]

Visitors are not here long term so representation and other determinations of federal funding would not be jeopardized.

The census doesn't ask how long people intend to be there. It could be a relative recuperating in your home before returning to their home state in a few weeks.

 

[dncc]

The census doesn't ask how long people intend to be there. It could be a relative recuperating in your home before returning to their home state in a few weeks.

And do you think that many statistical anomalies will make much of a difference in deciding representation?

 

[Rich2018]

And do you think that many statistical anomalies will make much of a difference in deciding representation?

They're not "statistical anomalies"

And yes, in statistical terms the number of people in the USA, who are here illegally or temporally (including the people who are temporally living in a second state) AND the people who move permanently to another state within a few months of filing out the census, is "statistically significant".

 

[dncc]

They're not "statistical anomalies"

And yes, in statistical terms the number of people in the USA, who are here illegally or temporally (including the people who are temporally living in a second state) AND the people who move permanently to another state within a few months of filing out the census, is "statistically significant".

I'll take your word for it. The number of transient persons at any given time would likely balance out however.

 

[Rich2018]

I'll take your word for it. The number of transient persons at any given time would likely balance out however.

Possibly, but I would guess that some states, particularly California and Florida (and maybe others like Arizona) have a higher transient population.

 

[Luther]

This should be an easy, no-brainer call for any principled jurist, especially an "originalist". Article I, Section 2, clause 3 or the Constitution states, in pertinent part: From the outset, everyone was counted. Even slaves and Indians were acknowledged as "persons", even if they were excluded or only accounted for as 3/5ths worth. It's simple to note that there was no distinction for citizenship or other status.

And, by the way, the President is given no role in "adjusting" those numbers. It's an Article I (Legislative) function.

From the outset, everyone was counted. Even slaves and Indians

Yeah, BUT we also didn't have at that time 12 to 20 million illegal aliens

 

[Luther]

Yes, illegal immigrants are people, and that doesn't justify them to illegally enter the United States.

Nor is it any justification for our politicians or citizenry to enable it

 

[Luther]

They are human beings on American soil so they should be treated as persons

Ah.... EMOTION

 

[Luther]

Just to let you good people know that this is the stupid shit Rome would have done

Destroy itself from within

 

[Grizzly Adams]

I think all visas should have an expiry date, by which the holder must leave or re-new

All visas do have an expiration date. However, the validity of a visa is only related to an alien's ability to apply for admission to the United States. An alien with the typical B1/B2 business/pleasure visa can apply for admission on the day the visa expires and will still get the usual 6 month admission, provided there are no other complications. The same is true for any other class of admission, including classes with an indefinite period of admission, such as F students and J exchange visitors: a visa must be valid on the day the alien applies for admission. After that threshold is met, period of stay is determined by other factors, such as passport validity, local port policy, class of admission, work petition expiration, etc.

However, this COVID pandemic, should not cause visa holders to leave before the purpose for being here is attained (should that have been delayed by the pandemic).

I agree. There was a push to expel from the US students whose universities were going to be 100% online for the fall semester. I thought that was a mistake, though I did see a reasonable basis for not admitting students going to those same universities. If they're already here there's no purpose in making them leave, but there's no reason to import persons who are possibly infected who could attend class from their home the same way they'd attend while in the US. The administration backed off on the first part of this plan; off the top of my head, I'm not sure what happened to the second part. However, I do know the administration's response to the pandemic has included an almost-unheard-of showing of leniency in the form of granting what is called "satisfactory departure" for aliens who will overstay their admission on the Visa Waiver Program. They get 90 days, no exceptions, no extensions, and adjusting status is not allowed. This limit is being flexed a little during the pandemic. The only other time I'm aware of VWP overstays not incurring consequences (such as never being able to enter without a visa again) is an allowance made in the days after 11 Sep 2001 when there was no air travel at all.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

No on both counts.

Visitors are not here long term so representation and other determinations of federal funding would not be jeopardized.

You're missing the point. The argument is that the Constitution requires a count of "the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed," so aliens unlawfully present should be counted and represented. There is no provision for not counting someone because federal funding won't be affected. If the argument for illegal aliens holds based on the words of the Constitution, then so too does the argument hold that visiting aliens should be counted. Persons on vacation on the census date in a different state should be counted in that state. People vacationing outside the country apparently don't deserve representation at all.

Prison inmates are wards of the State and therefore are not considered part of the population.

Sigh. Look before you leap, dude. Do some of the most basic research, like a Google search, instead of making shit up on the fly.