The Constitution uses the word "privilege", but it does not mention the concept of privilege as you are using it. "Privileges" in the constitution aren't distinct from or weaker than rights - they are considered fundamental rights. The Supreme Court said so and I think their interpretation counts for more than yours.
That is probably why you got down voted - your citation is factual, but completely misleading in context.
To address the specific example you mention here: the privilege of immunity from arrest for members of Congress cannot be infringed except for specific enumerated exceptions. It's not the kind if "privilege not a right" that may be arbitrarily harshly regulated that you were talking about.
The law is not stupid. Courts understand that words have more than one meaning and that context matters. Given how rude and condescending you have been on this thread, you should learn more about how constitutional law actually works.
That is probably why you got down voted - your citation is factual, but completely misleading in context.
To address the specific example you mention here: the privilege of immunity from arrest for members of Congress cannot be infringed except for specific enumerated exceptions. It's not the kind if "privilege not a right" that may be arbitrarily harshly regulated that you were talking about.
The law is not stupid. Courts understand that words have more than one meaning and that context matters. Given how rude and condescending you have been on this thread, you should learn more about how constitutional law actually works.