"...we have no rights."
The Obama administration deliberately targeted an American child and assassinated them by drone strike, without any accusation the child had done anything wrong, based on no known complaint at all. As far as I know, no legal action of any kind was taken as a result of the USG murdering an American child.
If we can just be killed, as Kareem was lucky not to be, we cannot have any rights. Any other rights are moot when we are dead. If the courts do not recognize that the only purpose of the USG is to protect the lives, property, and rights of Americans, and that means no business or information the USG has supersedes that purpose, then courts are no potential redress of grievances when the USG attempts to kill us. The courts then are aiding and abetting our murderous government. Since it was Congress that legislated the government that did this, they are also part and party to that crime against humanity that is the USG.
That leaves us to do anything about any of it ourselves, and given it's an existential threat from a virtual entity, no limit is potential to our acts to counter it.
Thanks!
RE: What This Court Case Really Signified -- Do We Have the Right to Exist?