Fact check: Is every person entitled to due process?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses overwhelmingly confirm that every person within U.S. borders is entitled to due process, regardless of citizenship status. Multiple sources cite the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution as the foundational legal basis for this protection ^{[1] [2]}. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that these constitutional protections extend to both citizens and non-citizens alike ^[2].

Due process rights include fundamental protections such as:

• Fair hearings before deportation
• Legal representation
• Habeas corpus protections
• Protection against refoulement ^[3]

However, there appears to be significant confusion and inconsistency within the Trump administration regarding this constitutional principle. While Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed that "of course" all people in the U.S. are entitled to due process ^[4], President Trump himself expressed uncertainty, stating "I don't know. I'm not, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know" when asked about due process rights ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial context about the practical implementation challenges and policy conflicts surrounding due process rights:

• The Trump administration has significantly expanded expedited removal proceedings, which critics argue undermines fundamental due process protections and increases the risk of errors and unjust outcomes ^[6]
• There is a discrepancy between stated commitments to due process and actual deportation policies being implemented by the administration ^[4]
• Current immigration policies are actively undermining due process rights despite constitutional guarantees, particularly through expedited removal procedures that limit individuals' ability to present their cases ^{[3] [7]}

Political and institutional actors who benefit from different interpretations include:

• Immigration enforcement agencies and their contractors who benefit financially from streamlined deportation processes
• Civil rights organizations like the Vera Institute and Immigration Forum who advocate for stronger due process protections
• Political figures who use immigration enforcement as a campaign issue

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself is not biased or misleading - it asks a straightforward constitutional question. However, the question's simplicity obscures the complex reality of how due process rights are being challenged in practice.

The most concerning finding is that the sitting President expressed uncertainty about a fundamental constitutional principle ^[5], while his own administration implements policies that critics argue violate due process rights ^{[7] [6]}. This creates a dangerous precedent where constitutional protections may be undermined through claimed ignorance rather than direct challenge.

The analyses reveal that while the constitutional answer is clear and unambiguous, there is active political and policy resistance to implementing these protections fully, particularly for non-citizens facing deportation proceedings.