Bail and parole are such bullshit in the US, if rights are inalienable, and given that they are true to a person and not bestowed by the state then why can the first amendment be disregarded in tis circumstance? Becuase the amendments dont mean shit.
Bail and parole are such bullshit in the US, if rights are inalienable, and given that they are true to a person and not bestowed by the state then why can the first amendment be disregarded in tis circumstance? Becuase the amendments dont mean shit.
They can exercise those rights by serving their full sentence.
So the rights are conditional, pending government approval?
No, but you can agree to sign something that limits those rights in exchange for something else, like early release.