Constitutional Rights for Nonresident Aliens

A. Walen
{"title":"Constitutional Rights for Nonresident Aliens","authors":"A. Walen","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I argue that nonresident aliens, in places that are clearly not U.S. territory, should benefit from constitutional rights. This is a matter of mutuality of obligation. The U.S. claims the authority to hold all people accountable for respecting certain laws, such as the law of war as defined in the Military Commissions Act. Accordingly, it must accord them basic legal rights in return. At the same time, I argue, contra Benjamin Wittes, that this would not lead to absurdly opening the courthouse doors, nor does it require abandoning principle to keep the flood of litigation reasonably contained. Not all harms inflicted by the U.S. government can give rise to a lawsuit, and that the distinction between those who should have a right to sue and those who should not can be drawn in a principled way.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"29 1","pages":"2-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.292009.103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I argue that nonresident aliens, in places that are clearly not U.S. territory, should benefit from constitutional rights. This is a matter of mutuality of obligation. The U.S. claims the authority to hold all people accountable for respecting certain laws, such as the law of war as defined in the Military Commissions Act. Accordingly, it must accord them basic legal rights in return. At the same time, I argue, contra Benjamin Wittes, that this would not lead to absurdly opening the courthouse doors, nor does it require abandoning principle to keep the flood of litigation reasonably contained. Not all harms inflicted by the U.S. government can give rise to a lawsuit, and that the distinction between those who should have a right to sue and those who should not can be drawn in a principled way.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非居民外国人的宪法权利
我认为,在明显不属于美国领土的地方,非居民外国人应该受益于宪法权利。这是一个相互义务的问题。美国声称有权要求所有人遵守某些法律,例如《军事委员会法》中规定的战争法。因此,它必须给予他们基本的法律权利作为回报。与此同时,与本杰明·维茨(Benjamin Wittes)相反,我认为,这不会导致荒谬地打开法院的大门,也不需要放弃原则来合理地控制诉讼洪流。并不是美国政府造成的所有伤害都可以引起诉讼,谁有权起诉谁不应该起诉之间的区别可以用一种原则的方式来区分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Objectivity and Subjectivity in Theories of Well-Being Political Leadership and the Social Value of Privacy Some Scalar Issues in Climate Ethics Defining Scientific Integrity The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Repatriation of Refugees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1