Harmeet Dhillon Appears on Fox Business’ ‘The Evening Edit’ To Discuss Illegal Alien Gun Rights
According to Dhillon:
This is the very definition of chutzpah. I would have to say that this is a creative argument by the lawyer, and frankly it’s not a ridiculous argument. Out of the courts of appeals, three of them have held that the second amendment can be extended to non-citizens, although they haven’t necessarily looked at this illegal alien issue, and only one has said that the second amendment clearly does apply, so it’s three that don’t, one that does. what’s interesting here is that, if the government wins this argument, I assume that they’re prosecuting him because it’s the only way to get a prosecution in a sanctuary city that won’t prosecute him for violating the peace or disturbing the peace, the government of the United States is going to have to feed and clothe this guy for ten years and then deport him. Whereas, if they don’t win, ICE will deport him right away. So it’s kind of win-lose.
Dhillon Discusses Illegal Alien Gun Rights on ‘The Evening Edit’ from Harmeet Dhillon on Vimeo.
The framers of the constitution did not think about large populations of MS-13 gang members wielding guns in our cities and that being a protected right. I’m sure if they had thought about that, it would have been covered. And the second amendment wasn’t passed for that reason. But the seventh circuit, which has ruled that it can be applied to people like this, has said that the second amendment is not a second class right, it’s a first-class right, and so, like other rights, first amendment, fourth amendment, and others.
>> Actually, surprisingly, many of your viewers will be surprised to know that many of the rights of the constitution have been extended to illegal aliens, for example, so unfortunately, that’s something that will need to be addressed by the courts.
I think this case may be successful– it’s a constitutional challenge to the federal statute. Eventually, this issue is going to have to go up to the United States Supreme Court because there is a split of authority in the courts of appeals.
The precedent would be whether this Second Amendment right should be extended nationally to people who are here illegally. I don’t think it’s controversial at this time that it is already extended to people who are non-citizens who are here legally, but that distinction of illegal versus legal, which the left doesn’t want us to make, I think is an important distinction here.
That’s the argument that they’re making. I don’t think that’s the right outcome, but, like I said, one court has agreed with them on that, and that’s troubling in and of itself. And I think that there are a lot of issues here that the courts may want to reexamine because the same reasoning that would allow the extension of this right, has been used to extend the fifth amendment right, sixth amendment right to counsel, illegal aliens have the rights to schooling under a supreme court precedent, even though states have passed laws against that. So there is an extension of these rights unfortunately.
