Re: Profiling



jrosenbluth@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Alan Lichtenstein wrote:

jrosenbluth@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


Alan Lichtenstein wrote:


Josh Rosenbluth wrote:



Alan Lichtenstein wrote:



Josh Rosenbluth wrote:


Firstly, you don't have to be on US soil to have standing. A lawyer
in the USA can file on your behalf.


I believe you are wrong. Using that 'logic' anyone who is denied
entrance can have standing. It would appear that many so denied would
indeed attempt to sue. That has not occurred, likely because there is
no standing.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri

This guy is suing George Tenet because he was wrongly tortured. He
still can't get into the USA. The foreigners killed in Pan Am 103 sued
Pan Am. Foreign corporations sue the American government when they feel
American law does them wrong.

Standing has nothing to do with where you are.

If that is the case, then kindly explain why ANY individual who is a
foreigner NOT residing on U.S. Soil does NOT sue for discrimination
under the equal protection clause? None have. Why? Based on your
premise, it would be obvious that discrimination, even on the basis of
national origin violates the equal protection clause, and there ought to
be oddles and oddles of suits by foreigners.


As I explained previously, there is precedent that 1) the government
(particularly the federal government) can discriminate on the basis of
national origin in some cases and 2) the Equal Protection clause has
never been found to apply when an aline is denied a visa no matter what
reason the INS has given. The answer has nothing to do with standing -
but rather the scope of Equal Protection as determined by SCOTUS.

You've already explained that Government can legislate what it pleases.
But that wasn't the question. The question dealt with standing needed
to have access to the Court system. You seem to think that anyone can
have access to the Court system without having to be on U.S. Soil. I
asked you to explain why, if that was the case, the minions of the
underprivileged in foreign countries who are routinely denied entrance
do not sue under the equal protection clause. You have given your
opinion, and I would appreciate your citation of the pertinent court
cases that support same. I do not believe there are any, because in
order to enter the suit, one must be on U.S. soil, and if one is denied
entrance, one does not have access to the courts.


I linked to the El-Masri case. He sued even though he is not in the
USA. His case did not concern denial of a visa, thus you can be
correct only if there is a rule specific to visa denials that you have
to be in the USA to have standing. Please provide a citation for such
a rule.

I have already refuted your use of the El-Masari case, and see no need to repeat myself. My claim was not that I had the citations, but merely stating that standing in country is necessary to enter suit. If you bothered to read the thread, I said I was unaware of any suit entered as such, and believe none exist. hence, if none exist, there can be no citation regarding nonexistent events. My query regarding the ACLU and their obvious silence in initiating a suit on behalf of the minions of the downtrodden who are excluded entry by legislation appears to refute your contention that the individual instigating such a suit need not be present in the U.S. to do so. Your failed to respond to that dilemma. and have yet to address it. Please do so. I would be most interested in your explanation, as to what you conjecture as the ACLU's failure to address this apparent inequity. The Equal Protection clause does appear to be a sound basis for raising that issue. But, if the individual needs to be on U.S. soil to have access to the courts, then it is evident why the issue was not raised. However, if you are correct, then my question as to WHY the ACLU has not raised it is most germane. Your explanation would be appreciated.
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Profiling
    ... entrance can have standing. ... national origin violates the equal protection clause, ... have access to the Court system without having to be on U.S. Soil. ... stating that standing in country is necessary to enter suit. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: State high court clears way for Prop. 8 forces
    ... continue the suit in federal court. ... not whether they have standing to sue. ... but rather because your suit is frivolous. ... but that is a question for a judge to answer about the merits - not standing. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Where is Obamas birth certificate ?
    ... that the plaintiff "doesn't have standing" to bring the suit. ... "Senator Barack Hussein Obama". ... "all attempts at legal discovery have been tossed ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: Where is Obamas birth certificate ?
    ... The Constitution's rule that the president be 'a natural born ... that the plaintiff "doesn't have standing" to bring the suit. ... It takes maybe a minute to Google up the complaint, and -- oh look -- the second of the many listed defendants is "Senator Barack Hussein Obama". ... "all attempts at legal discovery have been tossed on the excuse that the plaintiff 'doesn't have standing' to bring the suit." ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: State high court clears way for Prop. 8 forces
    ... continue the suit in federal court. ... not whether they have standing to sue. ... but rather because your suit is frivolous. ... Frivolity ...
    (soc.retirement)