[bongobongo]

You may not know this, but the Constitution guarantees the same rights to foreigners on US soil as it does to US citizens. (This is a pretty basic part of civic education, but civic education in the US these days is terrible.)

So, no, I would not be OK with the government violating the Constitution.

[thebooktocome]

This isn't actually true. The majority of constitutional rights apply to foreigners, but some don't.

https://www.learnliberty.org/blog/t-he-constitutional-rights...

[inlined]

But borders are held to have suspended rights. And a large majority of the population lives within 100 miles of the border.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html

It’s also been hypothesized that the “border” could be expanded to include many more. International airports are arguably ports of entry. Native American territories and embassies + consulates are considered foreign soil.

[vecplane]

This is true, and an arbitrary stance like certain videos on your phone prevent entry into the US isn't appropriate. But at the same time, any country reserves the right to deny entry based on reasonable criteria. It's just a question of what those criteria are, and how much access the state should have to search someone upon entering.

[cat199]

> on US soil

But not before they have technically entered..

(and no, this doesn't mean i'm anti immigration)

edit: or pro searching, etc