# Democrats Hold Sit-In on House Floor **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 22, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060 "2016-06-22T17:19:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/181 "2016-06-23T20:22:12Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The right to travel internationally as recognized by[Kent v. Dulles.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_v._Dulles) The right to travel =/= the right travel by plane. But note from that case: > [@](#): > > The cases were heard on writ of certiorari. 355 U.S. 881. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals. Kent v Dulles was the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the right to travel is a part of the “liberty” of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. It did not decide the extent to which this liberty right can be curtailed. The Court was first concerned with the extent, if any, to which Congress had authorized its curtailment by the U.S. Secretary of State. The Court found that the Secretary of State exceeded his authority by refusing to issue passports to Communists. > > It did not rule on the constitutionality of the law because the only law which Congress had passed expressly curtailing the movement of Communists across U.S. borders had yet to take effect. Six years later, the Court in Aptheker v. Secretary of State,[2] found that the law violated First Amendment principles and left unsettled the extent to which this liberty right to travel can be curtailed. A very narrow ruling. > [@](#): > > This was identified in the [lawsuit that the ACLU won in district court](https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/no_fly_list_ruling__-_latif_v._holder_-_6-24-14.pdf), and has continued to push through the process as the remedies offered by the government have not been sufficient. Lots to read on that ruling. More later. But the notion begs the reader to ask the question: Why is the No Fly List still in use, if it has been ruled unconstitutional? Is it that the SCOTUS has yet to rule on it? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/182 "2016-06-23T20:26:33Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > All good stuff. Wonder if John might form an opinion now. I would defer to the **Richard’s** analysis. He’s the expert here, not us. But note that neither of those mentioned the 4th amendment. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/183 "2016-06-23T20:30:20Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I would defer to the **Richard’s** analysis. He’s the expert here, not us. But note that neither of those mentioned the 4th amendment. Like I said, I apparently mistook your comment as being part of an earlier back and forth about whether generally we’ve lost or gained rights. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/184 "2016-06-23T20:43:27Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I might have mistook your answer to elucidator as a comment to the more general “are we losing/gaining losing rights”. If thats actually the case then the Monday Supreme Court decision is yet another one of the many exceptions that have been carved out of the 4th. If I was mistaken, I don’t have any position on what rights are taken away by the no-fly list. Sorry, didn’t see this one. I find it useful to be at least little bit humble when it comes to questions of constitutionality. I’m pretty familiar with 2nd amendment jurisprudence and I know the SCOTUS has ruled that individuals have the right own guns. And that right can’t be taken away without due process. I don’t know nearly as much about the “right to travel”, but suspect it is a bit more complicated that it would appear on the surface, especially since it isn’t spelled out anywhere in the constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/185 "2016-06-23T21:35:43Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > But the notion begs the reader to ask the question: Why is the No Fly List still in use, if it has been ruled unconstitutional? Is it that the SCOTUS has yet to rule on it? That’s probably one of the reasons. It’s hard to challenge I’d imagine, what with all the information being secret. It was also created somewhat recently in SCOTUS time frames. Look at the incident with [Rahinah Ibrahim](http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/08/10-15873.pdf). Her adventure started in 2005 and was adjudicated in 2014. [She won at the district level](http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2014/02/ibraruling.pdf) after the [9th circuit remanded](http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/08/10-15873.pdf) and the DOJ said they do not intend to appeal. Oddly the plaintiff’s daughter was a witness and a US born citizen and was not permitted to board a plane to attend the trial because she was also on the no-fly list erroneously. Another interesting tidbit, when Ibrahim was denied entry at various times, she was given a letter informing her that the Department of State was unable to issue her a visa. On the form she received, it was check boxed the reason was Section 212(a)(3)B and \*\*literally \*\*someone hand wrote the word (Terrorist) on the form. From the district court opinion: > [@](#): > > With respect to Dr. Ibrahim, the private interests at stake in her 2005 deprivations were the > right to travel, Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125 (1958), and the right to be free from > incarceration, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 529 (2004), and from the stigma and humiliation > of a public denial of boarding and incarceration, Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693, 701, 711 (1976), any > one of which would be sufficient and all three of which apply on this record. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/186 "2016-06-23T23:02:42Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The NRA’s power lies in the votes it commands. They don’t sway votes with money the way corporations and many other interest groups do. WTF? Now how about answering the question: As a loyal Republican, does it make you happy or sad that, electorally, they are clearly the party of the NRA? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/187 "2016-06-24T00:48:48Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > That’s probably one of the reasons. It’s hard to challenge I’d imagine, what with all the information being secret. It was also created somewhat recently in SCOTUS time frames. Look at the incident with [Rahinah Ibrahim](http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/08/10-15873.pdf). Her adventure started in 2005 and was adjudicated in 2014. [She won at the district level](http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2014/02/ibraruling.pdf) after the [9th circuit remanded](http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/02/08/10-15873.pdf) and the DOJ said they do not intend to appeal. Oddly the plaintiff’s daughter was a witness and a US born citizen and was not permitted to board a plane to attend the trial because she was also on the no-fly list erroneously. Another interesting tidbit, when Ibrahim was denied entry at various times, she was given a letter informing her that the Department of State was unable to issue her a visa. On the form she received, it was check boxed the reason was Section 212(a)(3)B and \*\*literally \*\*someone hand wrote the word (Terrorist) on the form. > > From the district court opinion: I’m hoping **Richard Parker** comes back in gives us his opinion on how SCOTUS might rule. I would LIKE to think the whole thing is unconstitutional, but you never know… Obviously Obama and Hillary think it’s constitutional. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/188 "2016-06-24T03:05:18Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > It’s the Republicans blocking a vote on gun legislation. The Democrats would stop their sit in as soon as the legislation is brought up. Well, that didn’t work out as planned. 😉 Apparently the Democrats suddenly stop reliving their hippy daze of the 60’s and 70’s or couldn’t remember falling down? Why else would 70 year olds be sitting on the floor? A sit-in? Really? It was painful watching those olde folks sitting on the floor. Heck, it was painful watching those olde folks TRYING to get down to the floor. Fortunately, House Democrats came to their senses (maybe their Depends were full?) and called off their Congressional version of Occupy Wall Street. Yawn. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/189 "2016-06-24T03:37:04Z")
1. It stole Trump’s thunder (and press coverage) on the day he gave his magical anti-Hillary speech. 2. It paints the Republicans as soft on terror. 3. It reinforces the notion that Republicans are bought and paid for by the NRA. Regardless of whether it came to a vote, or passed, or the bill they were fighting for was even feasible, the Democrats won. The narrative coming out of this was that the Democrats are actually fighting for something, demanding safety for Americans, and that the Republicans were again putting their fingers in their ears and going “LALALALA” after another mass shooting, all while shutting off the Congressional camera feed so no one could see what was happening on the floor. But go ahead an yawn while your party continues to fiddle. ---
**Author:** ![danderson400](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bc79bd/32.png) [@danderson400](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/danderson400)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/190 "2016-06-24T03:40:48Z")
You know would it be funny if “Mary Ellen” and “Erin” from _The Waltons_ were arguing and Ted Poe banged the gavel to get them to shut up? it would be really funny and if they refused, then he would have gaveled them to their room! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/191 "2016-06-24T03:46:43Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > WTF? > > Now how about answering the question: As a loyal Republican, does it make you happy or sad that, electorally, they are clearly the party of the NRA? No more than it made me upset when the Democrats used to be the party of the ACLU. Our liberties should be the top priority of both parties. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/192 "2016-06-24T04:00:31Z")
what is so hard about this: Democrats need to get rhetorically and morally tougher on Radical Islamic Terror, and the Republicans have to stop being so theoretically and idealistic about guns; of course suspected Islamic terrorists shouldn’t be able to get them! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/193 "2016-06-24T04:10:51Z")
No they shouldn’t. But if you’re an American citizen, you have the right to own a gun unless denied that right through due process. Being on a secret list is not how it’s done here. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/194 "2016-06-24T04:12:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m hoping **Richard Parker** comes back in gives us his opinion on how SCOTUS might rule. I would LIKE to think the whole thing is unconstitutional, but you never know… Obviously Obama and Hillary think it’s constitutional. They aren’t going to rule on this case because there is not going to be an appeal. The district level is the highest level of adjudication. Your question about why the No-Fly list exists at all - because congressional actions have the presumption of constitutionality and it’s really hard to challenge the list. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/195 "2016-06-24T04:21:07Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No they shouldn’t. But if you’re an American citizen, you have the right to own a gun unless denied that right through due process. Being on a secret list is not how it’s done here. so we shouldn’t have terrorist watch lists? Wasn’t your argument the same argument liberals made in the 2000s about the Patriot Act? No watch list is perfect, but protecting the many is more important than pleasing the few NRA leaders. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/196 "2016-06-24T04:23:47Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No more than it made me upset when the Democrats used to be the party of the ACLU. Our liberties should be the top priority of both parties. The ACLU is not a political organization. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/197 "2016-06-24T05:28:05Z")
> [@DerekMichaels00](#): > > so we shouldn’t have terrorist watch lists? Wasn’t your argument the same argument liberals made in the 2000s about the Patriot Act? No watch list is perfect, but protecting the many is more important than pleasing the few NRA leaders. We should have terrorist watch lists. The purpose of these lists is to let the FBI know who to keep an eye on. If you actually want to take away an American’s rights, then you have to prove something. Now for non-Americans, I’m fine with restrictions. No one has the right to travel here, or buy a gun once they do travel here. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/198 "2016-06-24T10:46:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No more than it made me upset when the Democrats used to be the party of the ACLU. You’re still evading. Is it good or bad that your party is opposed to the civil liberties that the Democrats support? Is it good or bad, in either the moral or electoral sense, that the party to whom you are loyal is the party of the NRA? > [@](#): > > Our liberties should be the top priority of both parties. But they are not, as you know. Your party does not support the right to life of the already-born, instead supporting a right to kill. It’s certainly understandable that you can’t address that basic truth comfortably. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/199 "2016-06-24T10:50:07Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Apparently the Democrats suddenly stop reliving their hippy daze of the 60’s and 70’s or couldn’t remember falling down? This has been a fairly civil debate. Knock off the stupid, partisan comments. (Particularly inappropriate given that the Democrats are following the actions of the 2008 Republicans–with Ryan is behaving just like Pelosi at that time). [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060/200 "2016-06-24T10:50:24Z")
You seem to have trouble with the concept of rights. Republicans absolutely support the right to life of the already born. Rights do not require a financial payout. That’s known as a benefit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-hold-sit-in-on-house-floor/758060.md?page=11)