When I got to the office I wrote a "blog" entry about the host's diatribe for azcentral.com, in which I pointed out a few flaws in Jacobs' argument.
But that's not enough. Not based on a chat I've had with Jacobs or on some of the responses that I read. And not since a call I received this week from a reader who said, "I don't have a computer and have no idea what a blog is. It sounds like something that I would get stuck in if my car drove off the road."
Spend any time on the Internet and you know that he is exactly correct.
A blog is a briefer, more conversational version of a newspaper column
written only for the Internet. Online readers, owing to anonymity and the
ability to respond immediately, are less reserved than traditional readers,
transforming many "blogs" into typewritten barroom brawls.
The conversation often spins off the road, leaving civilized discourse
covered in the muck thrown off by the spinning wheels of anger, indignation
and mindless political ideology.
But not always. In this case, while many readers want to believe that
illegal immigrants don't have constitutional rights, or shouldn't
have them, most people seem to understand that they do have rights. But not
everyone.
For doubters, I contacted Clint Bolick, director of the Center for
Constitutional Litigation at the conservative Goldwater Institute and asked
if he would answer the question.
"There are a handful of constitutional provisions that specifically apply to
citizens (including the right to vote and the right to hold public office),"
Bolick said. "But equal protection and due process under the 14th Amendment,
for reasons that are not historically clear, pertain to 'persons' and not
citizens. And the Bill of Rights in its entirety applies to illegal
immigrants."
He added that unless the Constitution specifically says that its rights
apply only to citizens, then they apply to everyone.
"The whole idea of natural rights that the U.S. Constitution is based upon
is that these are universal rights," Bolick said.
I spoke to Jacobs on the telephone later Wednesday and he said at first that
he understands that illegal immigrants have "some" constitutional rights, as
when accused of a crime. But he doesn't believe that they should have the
right to gather for demonstrations like those held last year, even if the
right to freely assemble is in the First Amendment, part of the Bill of
Rights that Bolick says applies to everyone.
"I could take out my Ouija board and say that they (the founders) would not
give these rights to foreigners, " Jacobs said.
"I am not ready to fold my tent and say that I'm wrong here. This (the
constitution) doesn't say specifically that foreigners have a right
to assemble."
Later, he called and left a message on my voice mail pointing out that the
Constitution begins, "We the People of the United States in Order to form a
more perfect Union . . . "
Jacobs added, "People here illegally are not the people of the United
States, so I think I got this one. So, you go back and change this article
(meaning the blog on the web site) and give me my love, give me my due."
That last quote is actually a lot like the stuff you'd read on an Internet
blog. Scary, isn't it?
Reach Montini at 602-444-8978 or
ed.montini@arizonarepublic.com. Read his blog at
montiniblog.azcentral.com.