Google ACLU and ICE and you’ll find cases. They’re paying attention and I’m glad they exist to watch out for our freedoms.
UCB, you don’t. That’s why people like those legally working in Ann Arbor were arrested and held.
People are being detained for the crime of having brown skin. It’s been proven over and over and it’s been proven illegal over and over. But since laws are selectively enforced and people are granted pardons for breaking those laws, there’s zero incentive for ICE and other officials to actually follow the damn laws.
And THAT should scare the crap out of every single person, legally here or not.
Foreigners are neither bound by nor protected by America’s Constitution.
The homeowner might have cause against ICE though, if they damaged his house to arrest the fellow they thought was illegal.
For post 39, yes, I saw the movie Born In East L.A.
My daughter has been stopped in ICE roadblocks twice (they are like DUI roadblocks). Both times they asked if she was a citizen, both time she said yes, and that was it. She is Chinese and had no ID with her.
US citizens are not required to carry ID, but green card holders and others here on a visa ARE required to have their federal identification with them. My cousin’s husband is, gasp, Canadian but always has his green card with him.
Others who can’t immediately have someone show up to provide an ID might want to have some ID on their person at all times. I think most Americans do, be it an DL, school ID, medicaid/medicare card. It is not required, but may prevent an inconvenience of having to have someone bring it to you if you are questioned. When I was in my first year of college, a guy from my dorm had been picked up for a curfew violation at about 11 pm. The town had a 10 pm curfew for those under 18. It was rarely enforced (I grew up in that town). I don’t know why this guy didn’t have an ID on him but he didn’t. He kept calling the dorm (way back when there were no cell phones and he had to call the hall phone and hope someone answered it) and no one was home. Of course not, everyone was out drinking! He wasn’t arrested but was held until someone could bring his wallet.
“Foreigners are neither bound by nor protected by America’s Constitution”
You might want to actually read up on that claim. You’ll find much on the internet that states otherwise. Including this. Feel free to check other sources. Also, I assume you meant to say “illegal aliens” not “foreigners”. Since the definition of foreigner is “a person born in or coming from a country other than one’s own”, I guess you are saying the first lady doesn’t have constitutional rights. 
https://immigration.lawyers.com/general-immigration/legal-rights-of-illegal-immigrants.html
You don’t have to answer ICE questions about your immigration status just because they ask. Watch this video:
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-if-questioned-about-your-immigration-status
If you could point me towards court rulings against sanctuary cities, I would appreciate being educated. If it’s as obvious and blatant as you say, surely there are many legal rulings against it given the current administration in DC. I hope you’ll forgive me for preferring to see federal court rulings vs your personal opinion as a form of evidence.
“Federal court rules against part of Trump plan to deny funds to sanctuary cities”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/09/15/federal-court-rules-against-part-of-trump-administration-effort-to-target-sanctuary-cities/?utm_term=.9c34bc4db2e5
“Federal Court Blocks Trump’s Crackdown on Sanctuary Cities”
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/09/federal-court-blocks-trump-crackdown-on-sanctuary-cities/540072/
“Federal judge again blocks Trump from punishing sanctuary cities”
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/15/politics/chicago-lawsuit-trump-sanctuary-cities-jag-funds/index.html
There will be differently minded federal judges. It’s part of the plan. An activist judicial branch will please some of the people for part of the time. Then it will p-off the same people in the future when the activist leanings change
A take on the legality of sanctuary cities
http://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/sanctuary-cities-thats-constitutional-hell-no
Most foreigners in the US are subject to the jurisdiction of the US (diplomatic types and such excepted). So the US Constitution and other laws apply to them. Note that the laws may distinguish between people and citizens for the purpose of various rights and duties, but that does not mean any blanket exemption for foreigners like what you claim.
Note that when US citizens carry ID, it often is not the kind that proves legal status. So US citizens may be difficult to distinguish from unauthorized immigrants based on routinely carried ID.
Exactly. We don’t go around carrying a national ID card.
^Maybe, we need a national ID card. With biometrics and secure chips, the federal government should be able to create a ID card far more secure than the driver’s licenses issued by states.
What’s next, chipping us all? No thank you.
In a way we’re moving there anyway with the new state IDs and plane travel.
This sums up my thinking on the issue:
https://www.aclu.org/other/5-problems-national-id-cards
Then there is also the federal vs. state rights/powers issue.
The securing of our borders is considered a constitutional duty of the federal government so wouldn’t be part of the “small government camp” by the GOP.
As for a national ID, this was pushed by the those on the left in the past.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card
general story about national ID cards back in 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/opinion/is-a-national-id-card-the-answer.html
The ACLU argument 3 is absurd. Databases are essential to the modern running of government. You couldn’t efficiently administer social security, Medicaid, Medicare, or Obamacare without databases. If you truly believe the federal government shouldn’t be running any databases, then you’re likely on the Ayn Rand side of the libertarian camp. Expanding uses would be the point, not a negative. We have a huge problem with identity theft, and the root of that problem is the lack of secure forms of identification.
Much different scope than a national ID system and several of the databases you cite aren’t all encompassing. Not the same, IMO.
National ID cards were too controversial when proposed some time ago. So the national government dumped the problem onto the states in the form of the Real ID Act. Many states have been unenthusiastic about it.
And those states may well have their residents unable to fly in 2018, barring another delay.
Well, so far with so many data breaches, how safe would a national ID be? Couldn’t that database be breached as well as one more way for your ID to be stolen. OYE!
The data breaches that you see are because the security people were quite stupid. Sensitive information should never be in cleartext, but always encrypted and decrypted only on the fly. In essence a company should be secure enough that they could hand all their hard drives to their enemies, who are then unable to do anything with them.