Soft launch of historical website — Calendar of civil liberties

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Brett Bellmore says:

    I have to admit that I’m puzzled how denying visas to foreigners based on their being carriers of an infectious disease is a “clvil liberties” issue. I mean, even setting aside the fact that non-citizens residing abroad don’t HAVE a “civil liberties” type relation to our government in the first place.

    • Joe says:

      If people are selectively treated in respect to infectious disease, especially in a type of way that is likely or at least possibly be discriminatory against certain classes of people, why wouldn’t it possibly be a civil liberty issue?

      Also, “persons” have rights in this country in a range of ways, including non-citizens who are currently on U.S. soil. Finally, asylum rules could be a “civil liberty” issue & by its nature would include people trying to get the right to stay.

  2. Brett Bellmore says:

    ” including non-citizens who are currently on U.S. soil.”

    But, if you’ve been denied a visa, then you shouldn’t be on U.S. soil, no? So denial of a visa can’t fall into that exception.

    We have long routinely barred entry to people who are carriers of serious, contagious diseases. Most nations do the same. Denial of entry to HIV carriers wasn’t a discriminatory exception to general policy. Permitting entry to HIV carriers was the exception, and, yes, quite likely motivated by discrimination.