[ceejayoz]

> The U.S. Constitution does not apply to non-citizens because the United States of America has NO sovereignty outside its borders.

There are plenty of non-citizens within its borders.

The US Constitution deliberately and carefully uses "citizens" in some spots and "persons" in others. Stuff dealing with voting, for example, uses "citizens", while things like the First and Fifth amendments say "people".

As a result green card holder (sensibly enough) has the right to free speech, freedom of religion, a jury trial, can't be made a slave, etc. They don't have a right to vote or run for the Presidency.

[ComputerGuru]

I don’t know why you used the example of a green card citizen when even an illegal immigrant has rights under the constitution, let alone a traveler on a visa.

[ceejayoz]

I used it because it should be fairly obvious that a green-card holder would have freedom of speech and religion etc. It's a clearer "oh, that makes sense" than something like a temporary visitor.

[ComputerGuru]

Yup. But my point was that the constitution actually makes it a point to grant those privileges to persons and not citizens or even permanent residents. It's not a happenstance, it was deliberate wording on the part of the Founding Fathers and it's been upheld every single time in courts high and low. If you're in the US, the same dignities and protections afforded to US citizens under the US Constitution and in particular the Bill of Rights are extended to you.

People might believe that green-card holders are "special" in that regard because they're on their way to becoming permanent citizens, but they would be mistaken.