Nina Totenberg, an old gasbag who fancies herself the Queen Mother in the court of professional babblers and scribblers, is proof we need term limits on journalists as much as politicians, too. Let's not forget how she tried to shank Clarence Thomas back in 1991.
I’m definitely not a “living Constitution” guy, but birthright citizenship was set up long before jet airplanes can whisk a woman into the country to give birth and then fly back with her US citizen newborn. Things change.
True, and it was originally intended mainly to grant citizenship to ex-slaves, who were residents of their states. I don’t see how the law would apply to transient visitors. It would make about as much sense to say, “Anyone who stands on U.S. territory and sneezes, is automatically granted citizenship.”
The original inent of the Framers is all that is important.
Does anybody in their right mind believe it was the intent of the Framers that some woman from some God forsaken hell-hole should be able to cross a river, squat, and push out an American citizen?
The Literalist are only Literalist when it suits their purpose.
Can we please cancel all those stupid no kings rallies now and quit bitching about the end of democracy? Thank you on behalf of sane people. And reading and talking about Iran is as tiresome as watching reruns of poor Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Nothing short of another series of well placed bunker bombs is going to change them. We are 75% there, just finish it. Wars suck, but humane wars just complicate outcomes when you are dealing with pure evil.
Douglas MacArthur, love him or hate him, nailed it when he declared to Congress, "In war there can be no substitute for victory." Sadly, that advice has generally gone unheeded in the decades that have passed.
Correct, and it should also be noted that MacArthur, along with Eisenhower, Goldwater, and other military veterans of World War Two, opposed the U.S. war in Vietnam.
MacArthur famously said: “Anyone wanting to commit ground troops to Asia should have his head examined.”
Goldwater, who was an aviator in the Pacific theater during the war, said if we were to go in, we should do it quickly, finish the job, and get out quickly.
Eisenhower said back in 1954 that a war in Indochina would be unwinnable (though he did express support for the domino theory). He refused to aid the French, who were foolishly attempting to reconquer Vietnam at the time.
That's a fact. In 1964, when MacArthur was dying at Walter Reed, he was visited by LBJ. During that visit, the old general advised the president against going to war in Vietnam.
If you are not following the latest UK employment tribunal Tempest v DEFRA Naomi Cunningham is currently cross examining the complainant Tempest, a trans woman. Tempest had to admit that there was nothing inherently wrong with the 300 picture book My Body is Me except that it depicted non gender conforming children who were comfortable with their bodies and Tempest did not feel that way about their body. The author of said book has been subjected to the most horrible abuse because certain trans activists falsely claimed the book was anti-trans. Tempest had clearly not read it when Tempest made the complaint. https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/2072256884598288458
America only works when the vast majority of her people respect the Constitution and choose to follow the law because it is the right thing to do to protect our civilization.
When a person breaks a law, there is no instant punishment .The burden always falls on the victim to amass the evidence, and the money to access the legal system within the statute of limitations. This is arduous expensive and very time consuming.
it pays to break laws because there is a great chance one wil get away with it
we are being invaded bt large numbers of ppl who hate America and our Constitution .
they have identified all the loopholes, leniencies, and vulnerabilities of our free open society and are actively exploiting every one of them. They are using the Constitution to destroy the Constitution.
Birthright citizenship was never intended for hostile foreign invaders.
Our elected officials seem incapable of fixing this glaring loophole.
The SCOTUS ruling demonstrates that the court refuses to protect America from the threat which is a National Security emergency .
We can't even deport Mahmoud Khalil and his partner in crime Moshen Mahdawi who are both under deportation orders.Both terror supporters are appealing to SCOTUS with Muslim Brotherhood money (its very expensive to mount a case to SCOTUS)
While our Courts refuse to deal with the real and present threat to our Country from hostile invader , the Constitution they think they are defending is being subverted and perverted.
The enemy makes no bones about their goal to establish the caliphate Umma -that is where their allegiance lies. The Constitution will soon be replaced with Sharia Law just as they did in Iran 1979
This ruling defends the sworn enemies of America .They are conquering with political Jihad
we must organize and make a plan
we are way behind the enemy in every way and our courts are incapable of protecting America
I don't disagree, but want to take a longer view of today's problems.
We've had crisises before, dating back to the Civil War. Can you imagine a repeat of that? We survived. We survived The Great Depression when people had to wait in line for a piece of bread and a bowl of soup.
We survived two World Wars, The Cold War, VietNam, and long waits in line to fill your car with gasoline. We survived an attack worse than Pearl Harbor.
We survived Harry Reid and Barak Obama. After all that, AOC, Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, and Elizabeth Warren are going to end the USA as we know it?
I don't think so. I'm betting on another 250 years for America.
The DSA wing is winning because the vast majority of young ppl have been indoctrinated from K-12 and beyond that America is evil born in the sin of slavery etc
Once a country loses its youth to an Un American ideology and imports enemies by the millions -the equations has been rewritten
It is for the Legislature to deal with. Congress needs to get its act together and close the loopholes if it sees fit. The SC does not want another Roe v Wade and executive orders can only go so far.
Sadly Congress is captured and corrupt with more and more DSA and Islamic members
we are watching the takeover in real time
The Court had the opportunity to Protect American Way of life and instead chose to protect the invaders
There are more than a million Chinese(CCP) birthright babies whose mothers were sent here by their government to create an army of "US Citizens" whose only allegiance is to the CCP.
Similarly many many (not all)here from Muslim Countries
This is coordinated and deliberate.
There is no way the framers the Constitution envisioned this
Failure to confront reality will be the end of America as we knew her. They hate The Constitution but have figured out how to use the document and our legal system to destroy America without firing a shot
The ruling may be short sighted. But executive orders are easily overturned with the next administration.
If the concept of birthright citizenship becomes an important enough issue, the correct place is the legislature with the potential for a Constitutional amendment if necessary. The checks and balances are there. It is time they creaked into action.
Well, it’s a good thing that the SC is allowing the counting of late mail in ballots because when those million plus “citizens” who live in China come of voting age it might take a few days to receive their ballots.
Then it is up to ordinary Americans to make this an important campaign issue and to explain in clear language why it is a necessary safeguard. If one looks at how the 18th amendment came into being and then its repeal -- state legislatures can be made to act.
I don't believe there is the willpower any longer to act.
Lots and lots of bitching and moaning but acting requires effort and I am afraid we no longer possess it.
Heck when paying more at the gas pump is more important than ridding the world of messianic madmen chanting Death Americ while seeking nukes then the chance of acting on this issue is nill.
I don't disagree but this is unlikely to happen .Very unlikely
The Court had the opportunity to protect the American way of life and chose not to regardless of their reasons .Reality does not care about their reasons
Judge Alito addressed this in his dissent
what is happening is real and relentless and our Supreme Court sided with the enemies of America, those who burn the flag and shout Death To America
"I don't disagree but this is unlikely to happen .Very unlikely"
Correct. But it's the way [i.e., congress passing laws] the constitution says it must. No shortcuts. The Court is not a legislative body that can make laws when Congress doesn't. Same(ish) with executive orders: President can't legislate either
Do you honestly think the all of the justices did not in good faith examine the law and the Constitution and vote as they believed was required by both? They are not supposed to rule according the outcome they might want.
The most suicidal decision by the SC in my lifetime.
A SUICIDE PACT
“The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson in Terminiello v. Chicago (1949).
Progressives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 14th Amendment.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Conservatives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Guys pick a lane.
Don’t be a hypocrite.
Reading the Constitution literally when it suits you and claiming that it should mean whatever you want it to mean when you don’t like it is hypocritical.
I am an Originalist on ALL of the Constitution.
I care about what the Framers intended…
Not some Literalist reading of it or even worse yet those who talk like a teenager when faced with an Amendment they dislike….. “WHATEVER!”
Suicidal, I am not!
And, if I am found strangled to death just know this…
I DID NOT KILL MYSELF.
“Cherchez la femme”
Alexandre Dumas’s 1854 novel The Mohicans of Paris
I neither know or really care about their intent. ( it probably is different for different justices )
the result is as I described. The invasion will continue and increase.
thats a fact . The enemies say so.
@Sarah Adams on X is an expert former CIA on counter terrorism
"An illegal foreign member of ISIS can have children here and they can stay as AMERICANS. That’s how ridiculous our judicial system has become. We will be destroyed from within. By choice."
these are the realities of the enemies of America.
Our Government (all branches) are incapable of protecting America as we know it
I trust in Providence and the fact that many come to love America and wish to protect the freedoms including the checks and balances.
I have just finished reading Stalin's Apostles and yes I agree those who wish to foment revolution and topple the West, particularly the American Experiment are using every means at their disposal. Luckily, thus far America has held firm.
The Supreme Court has upheld the right of foreign women from all over the world to enter the U.S. for a few hours and give birth to a U.S. citizen then leave again. Make that make sense!
What is the meaning of citizenship, if it is casually conferred on accidental visitors?
Perhaps the President’s legal team did not properly frame their case. The 14th Amendment which provides the right of “jus soli” was intended to confer citizenship upon freed slaves:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
If these people do not in fact reside in a State, then how the hell does this law apply to them?
Why the editorial love affair with birthright citizenship? We can go to the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal for that.
The most shocking thing about the Tom Kean story is that the House voted more than 100 times in recent months. I guess I've been wrong in believing our Congress does virtually nothing.
By a 5–4 vote, the justices held that children born to illegal immigrants and people on temporary visas are American citizens at birth. Jed Rubenfeld calls it a victory not just for the Constitution but for the country—regardless of which side of the issue you’re on.
'In my judgment, the court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country's future. Suppose that a person's only connection to this country is that he was born here to a mother who was present just long enough to give birth and then quickly return to her native country. Suppose that country is a strategic adversary or enemy of the United States. Suppose the child NEVER visited the United States while grow and was inculcated with hatred of this country. According to this court, now, that person is a citizen of the United States. He can enter and leave the country as he pleases. He can travel the world on a United States passport. Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent.' — Justice Samuel Alito
Also, is this milquetoast story from the same Jed Rubenfeld that has contributed to multiple democrats and was suspended from Yale for 2 years for alleged sexual misconduct before finally departing the University? Asking for a friend.
PS - Of course Yale has yet to release the details of their investigation (4 years later), so I'm sure there is nothing to it. Wink, wink.
This ruling should be clarifying for Americans.
There is no "conservative" Supreme Court.
There is no Republican-led Congress.
There’s actually not even a GOP.
America has transformed into a banana republic that’s run by a uniparty that can't be voted out of office.
The graft, corruption & lack of any moral compass is so rampant today that the only way to course correct at this point is via national divorce or revolution IMHO.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. We no longer have a country if millions of pregnant foreigners can fly in, give birth, and raise their paperwork American citizen children in other countries under adversarial regimes. Jed is still an Ivy League virtue signaler, just like the 3 leftist and 3 fake conservative justices. History will judge this as one of the most disastrous SCOTUS rulings in history. Mass deportations and denaturalizations are the only way to save America and the west.
I don’t know about Mr. Rubenfeld, nor am I a lawyer or scholar of the Constitution, but it seems rather obvious that the Court made a narrow decision based on some arcane arguments, instead of the originalist interpretation that one might have expected (see my comment above).
Sounds like the President’s team fumbled the ball in the end zone.
This AM I blocked an individual who celebrated the murder of Ashli Babbit on January the 6th.
I love debate and will wrestle with anyone on any issue.
However, when a commenter gets so radical that they justify and then celebrate murder I am through with that person.
Had a White male thug with a badge and a gun shot an unarmed Black female veteran I would condemn it without equivocation.
If that had happened, D.C. and most American cities would have been on fire (mostly peacefully) within hours of the shooting.
I wrote to Shane Gericke…
Truly the most repulsive comment I have ever read in the TFP and that is going a long way.
Shane go ahead and make your next disgusting reply.
BUT you and I are through.
As of tomorrow, you won't have to read any more of my comments nor I your sickening justification of a murder of an unarmed woman by a thug with a badge and a gun.
I will not respond
I will give you the last word to spew your filth.
You sir are despicable and an excellent example of what is so wrong with our country!
Sorry I didn’t answer the second part of your reply.
Some jerk was frothing at the mouth about how Orange Man had pardoned the J6 insurrectionist .
I replied that Trump couldn’t pardon Ashli Babbit.
At which point Shane jumped into priggishly explain to me as though he was lecturing a child about how the shooting was not only justified but actually good because it stopped the riot.
It took the XXI Amendment to repeal the XVIII Amendment.
Anybody who believes that the Congress can just pass a law and nullify the 14th Amendment is living in Never Never Land.
To believe that would mean that any party that captured Congress and the White House could repeal any Amendment and the Constitution itself thus nullifying Article V.
The chance of Amending the Constitution on the issue of birthright citizenship is ZERO!
ARTICLE V
“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”
There will not be any constitutional amendment. There will not be any legislation that fixes the problem. Half the country is ecstatic with the decision. And they still would pack the Court if they get the power ( or can the Court rule packing is unconstitutional).
Time to both ramp up deportations and time to restrict visas etc especially places like china and others who exploited the rule in the past and will ramp up going forward.
I still want to know exactly what benefits ( direct and indirect) a non american gets from the federal government and each state govt ( ALL BENEFITS and the cost to the US IN FULL).
If a non American has a baby who is a citizen does the mother have the legal right not to be deported (cannot deport the kid of course but any good mother certainly would want to take her baby w her). The Court ruled on THE LAW per Jed. What does THE LAW provide re illegal anchor baby mothers having right to remain. As the De.s might say : simply follow the law.
Finally does this court decision lead to more or less affordability for US citizens particularly if it leads to more babies born to those who are illegally and seek to use that to not be deported and leads to pregnant women coming here illegally to give birth. Again what are the numbers regarding govt outlays or do all these pregnant women pay taxes and on a net basis give more than they take. Just the facts and law please.
I'll bet if we taxed the f#%k out of remittances things might be a little different. Also make it so if you are on public assistance as an immigrant, remittances are illegal.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson in Terminiello v. Chicago (1949).
Progressives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 14th Amendment.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Conservatives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Guys pick a lane.
Don’t be a hypocrite.
Reading the Constitution literally when it suits you and claiming that it should mean whatever you want it to mean when you don’t like it is hypocritical.
I am an Originalist on ALL of the Constitution.
I care about what the Framers intended…
Not some Literalist reading of it or even worse yet those who talk like a teenager when faced with an Amendment they dislike….. “WHATEVER!”
Suicidal, I am not!
And, if I am found strangled to death just know this…
I DID NOT KILL MYSELF.
“Cherchez la femme”
Alexandre Dumas’s 1854 novel The Mohicans of Paris
Nina Totenberg, an old gasbag who fancies herself the Queen Mother in the court of professional babblers and scribblers, is proof we need term limits on journalists as much as politicians, too. Let's not forget how she tried to shank Clarence Thomas back in 1991.
I’m definitely not a “living Constitution” guy, but birthright citizenship was set up long before jet airplanes can whisk a woman into the country to give birth and then fly back with her US citizen newborn. Things change.
True, and it was originally intended mainly to grant citizenship to ex-slaves, who were residents of their states. I don’t see how the law would apply to transient visitors. It would make about as much sense to say, “Anyone who stands on U.S. territory and sneezes, is automatically granted citizenship.”
The original inent of the Framers is all that is important.
Does anybody in their right mind believe it was the intent of the Framers that some woman from some God forsaken hell-hole should be able to cross a river, squat, and push out an American citizen?
The Literalist are only Literalist when it suits their purpose.
Can we please cancel all those stupid no kings rallies now and quit bitching about the end of democracy? Thank you on behalf of sane people. And reading and talking about Iran is as tiresome as watching reruns of poor Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Nothing short of another series of well placed bunker bombs is going to change them. We are 75% there, just finish it. Wars suck, but humane wars just complicate outcomes when you are dealing with pure evil.
Douglas MacArthur, love him or hate him, nailed it when he declared to Congress, "In war there can be no substitute for victory." Sadly, that advice has generally gone unheeded in the decades that have passed.
Correct, and it should also be noted that MacArthur, along with Eisenhower, Goldwater, and other military veterans of World War Two, opposed the U.S. war in Vietnam.
MacArthur famously said: “Anyone wanting to commit ground troops to Asia should have his head examined.”
Goldwater, who was an aviator in the Pacific theater during the war, said if we were to go in, we should do it quickly, finish the job, and get out quickly.
Eisenhower said back in 1954 that a war in Indochina would be unwinnable (though he did express support for the domino theory). He refused to aid the French, who were foolishly attempting to reconquer Vietnam at the time.
That's a fact. In 1964, when MacArthur was dying at Walter Reed, he was visited by LBJ. During that visit, the old general advised the president against going to war in Vietnam.
agreed. "Nike" them - just do it already.
LOVE IT!
More common sense in your comment than all the other comments for many days combined.
Because I know the FP has covered Henry Nowak -- the IOPC has upgraded its investigation to gross misconduct for the first two police officers on the scene (ie the ones who handcuffed him and ignored his pleas that he couldn't breathe and was stabbed) . https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/henry-nowak-case-officers-investigation-6dwscwzv0 or https://archive.ph/9inza
If you are not following the latest UK employment tribunal Tempest v DEFRA Naomi Cunningham is currently cross examining the complainant Tempest, a trans woman. Tempest had to admit that there was nothing inherently wrong with the 300 picture book My Body is Me except that it depicted non gender conforming children who were comfortable with their bodies and Tempest did not feel that way about their body. The author of said book has been subjected to the most horrible abuse because certain trans activists falsely claimed the book was anti-trans. Tempest had clearly not read it when Tempest made the complaint. https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/2072256884598288458
oh, facts...
Ouch
America only works when the vast majority of her people respect the Constitution and choose to follow the law because it is the right thing to do to protect our civilization.
When a person breaks a law, there is no instant punishment .The burden always falls on the victim to amass the evidence, and the money to access the legal system within the statute of limitations. This is arduous expensive and very time consuming.
it pays to break laws because there is a great chance one wil get away with it
we are being invaded bt large numbers of ppl who hate America and our Constitution .
they have identified all the loopholes, leniencies, and vulnerabilities of our free open society and are actively exploiting every one of them. They are using the Constitution to destroy the Constitution.
Birthright citizenship was never intended for hostile foreign invaders.
Our elected officials seem incapable of fixing this glaring loophole.
The SCOTUS ruling demonstrates that the court refuses to protect America from the threat which is a National Security emergency .
We can't even deport Mahmoud Khalil and his partner in crime Moshen Mahdawi who are both under deportation orders.Both terror supporters are appealing to SCOTUS with Muslim Brotherhood money (its very expensive to mount a case to SCOTUS)
While our Courts refuse to deal with the real and present threat to our Country from hostile invader , the Constitution they think they are defending is being subverted and perverted.
The enemy makes no bones about their goal to establish the caliphate Umma -that is where their allegiance lies. The Constitution will soon be replaced with Sharia Law just as they did in Iran 1979
This ruling defends the sworn enemies of America .They are conquering with political Jihad
we must organize and make a plan
we are way behind the enemy in every way and our courts are incapable of protecting America
Brilliantly said!
We are indeed in Deep Kimchi.
thank you Lanny
we are screaming into to an abyss
We really need a plan and $$$ or there is no hope
Our government is ineffectual and is not going to save us
The enemy is organized well funded and relentless
we are not
I don't disagree, but want to take a longer view of today's problems.
We've had crisises before, dating back to the Civil War. Can you imagine a repeat of that? We survived. We survived The Great Depression when people had to wait in line for a piece of bread and a bowl of soup.
We survived two World Wars, The Cold War, VietNam, and long waits in line to fill your car with gasoline. We survived an attack worse than Pearl Harbor.
We survived Harry Reid and Barak Obama. After all that, AOC, Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, and Elizabeth Warren are going to end the USA as we know it?
I don't think so. I'm betting on another 250 years for America.
Keep betting
The DSA wing is winning because the vast majority of young ppl have been indoctrinated from K-12 and beyond that America is evil born in the sin of slavery etc
Once a country loses its youth to an Un American ideology and imports enemies by the millions -the equations has been rewritten
AGREED!
The attraction of "FREE STUFF" can only be beaten by a well organized, well financed, and energetic team.
That we don't have.
Respect your opinion and yes there will an America 250 years from now.
However the Rome of 2026 bears little to no resemblance to the Roman Empire.
WOW!
The most depressing and simultaneously the most accurate post I have read in some lengthy period of time.
It is for the Legislature to deal with. Congress needs to get its act together and close the loopholes if it sees fit. The SC does not want another Roe v Wade and executive orders can only go so far.
'Legislature' 'Congress'
Facepalm. Lame ducks, 99.999% of them.
Preening, squawking, squabbling, strutting gaggle of poultry.
Sadly Congress is captured and corrupt with more and more DSA and Islamic members
we are watching the takeover in real time
The Court had the opportunity to Protect American Way of life and instead chose to protect the invaders
There are more than a million Chinese(CCP) birthright babies whose mothers were sent here by their government to create an army of "US Citizens" whose only allegiance is to the CCP.
Similarly many many (not all)here from Muslim Countries
This is coordinated and deliberate.
There is no way the framers the Constitution envisioned this
Failure to confront reality will be the end of America as we knew her. They hate The Constitution but have figured out how to use the document and our legal system to destroy America without firing a shot
this ruling is short sighted
The ruling may be short sighted. But executive orders are easily overturned with the next administration.
If the concept of birthright citizenship becomes an important enough issue, the correct place is the legislature with the potential for a Constitutional amendment if necessary. The checks and balances are there. It is time they creaked into action.
Well, it’s a good thing that the SC is allowing the counting of late mail in ballots because when those million plus “citizens” who live in China come of voting age it might take a few days to receive their ballots.
“ important enough issue”??
it already is a national emergency
We are reaching the tipping point a d then it will be too late-game over
"The checks and balances are there. It is time they creaked into action."
Couldn't agree more but the chances of action are as close to zero as I've seen in my lifetime.
Then it is up to ordinary Americans to make this an important campaign issue and to explain in clear language why it is a necessary safeguard. If one looks at how the 18th amendment came into being and then its repeal -- state legislatures can be made to act.
That was then.
This is now.
I don't believe there is the willpower any longer to act.
Lots and lots of bitching and moaning but acting requires effort and I am afraid we no longer possess it.
Heck when paying more at the gas pump is more important than ridding the world of messianic madmen chanting Death Americ while seeking nukes then the chance of acting on this issue is nill.
I don't disagree but this is unlikely to happen .Very unlikely
The Court had the opportunity to protect the American way of life and chose not to regardless of their reasons .Reality does not care about their reasons
Judge Alito addressed this in his dissent
what is happening is real and relentless and our Supreme Court sided with the enemies of America, those who burn the flag and shout Death To America
"I don't disagree but this is unlikely to happen .Very unlikely"
Correct. But it's the way [i.e., congress passing laws] the constitution says it must. No shortcuts. The Court is not a legislative body that can make laws when Congress doesn't. Same(ish) with executive orders: President can't legislate either
The dissenting Minority are not legislating
they are interpreting ( correctly imo) to deal with the reality of the National Emergency facing our republic
The big picture must be taken into the deliberation
And the majority refused to deal with the reality
that’s a real problem
Do you honestly think the all of the justices did not in good faith examine the law and the Constitution and vote as they believed was required by both? They are not supposed to rule according the outcome they might want.
The most suicidal decision by the SC in my lifetime.
A SUICIDE PACT
“The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson in Terminiello v. Chicago (1949).
Progressives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 14th Amendment.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Conservatives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Guys pick a lane.
Don’t be a hypocrite.
Reading the Constitution literally when it suits you and claiming that it should mean whatever you want it to mean when you don’t like it is hypocritical.
I am an Originalist on ALL of the Constitution.
I care about what the Framers intended…
Not some Literalist reading of it or even worse yet those who talk like a teenager when faced with an Amendment they dislike….. “WHATEVER!”
Suicidal, I am not!
And, if I am found strangled to death just know this…
I DID NOT KILL MYSELF.
“Cherchez la femme”
Alexandre Dumas’s 1854 novel The Mohicans of Paris
Think Hillary!
I neither know or really care about their intent. ( it probably is different for different justices )
the result is as I described. The invasion will continue and increase.
thats a fact . The enemies say so.
@Sarah Adams on X is an expert former CIA on counter terrorism
"An illegal foreign member of ISIS can have children here and they can stay as AMERICANS. That’s how ridiculous our judicial system has become. We will be destroyed from within. By choice."
these are the realities of the enemies of America.
Our Government (all branches) are incapable of protecting America as we know it
I trust in Providence and the fact that many come to love America and wish to protect the freedoms including the checks and balances.
I have just finished reading Stalin's Apostles and yes I agree those who wish to foment revolution and topple the West, particularly the American Experiment are using every means at their disposal. Luckily, thus far America has held firm.
I trust God
but humans have to do their part
capitulating to the enemies of America is not doing our part
other civilizations throughout history have crumbled. why do you think /believe that America is immune from failure?
The Supreme Court has upheld the right of foreign women from all over the world to enter the U.S. for a few hours and give birth to a U.S. citizen then leave again. Make that make sense!
What is the meaning of citizenship, if it is casually conferred on accidental visitors?
Perhaps the President’s legal team did not properly frame their case. The 14th Amendment which provides the right of “jus soli” was intended to confer citizenship upon freed slaves:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
If these people do not in fact reside in a State, then how the hell does this law apply to them?
Why the editorial love affair with birthright citizenship? We can go to the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal for that.
The most shocking thing about the Tom Kean story is that the House voted more than 100 times in recent months. I guess I've been wrong in believing our Congress does virtually nothing.
Pamela they can vote a 1,000 times every day.
It is the content of the laws not the number of laws passed that matter.
Naming a Post Office isn't exactly fixing our problems.
By a 5–4 vote, the justices held that children born to illegal immigrants and people on temporary visas are American citizens at birth. Jed Rubenfeld calls it a victory not just for the Constitution but for the country—regardless of which side of the issue you’re on.
Care to place a small wager on that!
Justice Alito on birthright citizenship:
'In my judgment, the court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country's future. Suppose that a person's only connection to this country is that he was born here to a mother who was present just long enough to give birth and then quickly return to her native country. Suppose that country is a strategic adversary or enemy of the United States. Suppose the child NEVER visited the United States while grow and was inculcated with hatred of this country. According to this court, now, that person is a citizen of the United States. He can enter and leave the country as he pleases. He can travel the world on a United States passport. Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent.' — Justice Samuel Alito
Also, is this milquetoast story from the same Jed Rubenfeld that has contributed to multiple democrats and was suspended from Yale for 2 years for alleged sexual misconduct before finally departing the University? Asking for a friend.
PS - Of course Yale has yet to release the details of their investigation (4 years later), so I'm sure there is nothing to it. Wink, wink.
This ruling should be clarifying for Americans.
There is no "conservative" Supreme Court.
There is no Republican-led Congress.
There’s actually not even a GOP.
America has transformed into a banana republic that’s run by a uniparty that can't be voted out of office.
The graft, corruption & lack of any moral compass is so rampant today that the only way to course correct at this point is via national divorce or revolution IMHO.
Of course I’m open to differing opinions.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. We no longer have a country if millions of pregnant foreigners can fly in, give birth, and raise their paperwork American citizen children in other countries under adversarial regimes. Jed is still an Ivy League virtue signaler, just like the 3 leftist and 3 fake conservative justices. History will judge this as one of the most disastrous SCOTUS rulings in history. Mass deportations and denaturalizations are the only way to save America and the west.
I don’t know about Mr. Rubenfeld, nor am I a lawyer or scholar of the Constitution, but it seems rather obvious that the Court made a narrow decision based on some arcane arguments, instead of the originalist interpretation that one might have expected (see my comment above).
Sounds like the President’s team fumbled the ball in the end zone.
"Sounds like the President’s team fumbled the ball in the end zone".
I think a better analogy would be that the refs blew the call. Not surprising when one of the "Justices" can't even define what a woman is.
“THE SHOOTING WAS JUSTIFIED BY ANY STANDARD…”
This AM I blocked an individual who celebrated the murder of Ashli Babbit on January the 6th.
I love debate and will wrestle with anyone on any issue.
However, when a commenter gets so radical that they justify and then celebrate murder I am through with that person.
Had a White male thug with a badge and a gun shot an unarmed Black female veteran I would condemn it without equivocation.
If that had happened, D.C. and most American cities would have been on fire (mostly peacefully) within hours of the shooting.
I wrote to Shane Gericke…
Truly the most repulsive comment I have ever read in the TFP and that is going a long way.
Shane go ahead and make your next disgusting reply.
BUT you and I are through.
As of tomorrow, you won't have to read any more of my comments nor I your sickening justification of a murder of an unarmed woman by a thug with a badge and a gun.
I will not respond
I will give you the last word to spew your filth.
You sir are despicable and an excellent example of what is so wrong with our country!
Shoot I missed that - Shane and I have disagreed many times but respectfully. What story was this thread on?
Sorry I didn’t answer the second part of your reply.
Some jerk was frothing at the mouth about how Orange Man had pardoned the J6 insurrectionist .
I replied that Trump couldn’t pardon Ashli Babbit.
At which point Shane jumped into priggishly explain to me as though he was lecturing a child about how the shooting was not only justified but actually good because it stopped the riot.
Agree with you on Shane.
We have crossed swords before and it has always been respectful.
Have no idea what got into him but the snide comments and celebration of the Babbit shooting was too much for me.
READ THE CONSTITUTION!
It took the XXI Amendment to repeal the XVIII Amendment.
Anybody who believes that the Congress can just pass a law and nullify the 14th Amendment is living in Never Never Land.
To believe that would mean that any party that captured Congress and the White House could repeal any Amendment and the Constitution itself thus nullifying Article V.
The chance of Amending the Constitution on the issue of birthright citizenship is ZERO!
ARTICLE V
“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”
There will not be any constitutional amendment. There will not be any legislation that fixes the problem. Half the country is ecstatic with the decision. And they still would pack the Court if they get the power ( or can the Court rule packing is unconstitutional).
Time to both ramp up deportations and time to restrict visas etc especially places like china and others who exploited the rule in the past and will ramp up going forward.
I still want to know exactly what benefits ( direct and indirect) a non american gets from the federal government and each state govt ( ALL BENEFITS and the cost to the US IN FULL).
If a non American has a baby who is a citizen does the mother have the legal right not to be deported (cannot deport the kid of course but any good mother certainly would want to take her baby w her). The Court ruled on THE LAW per Jed. What does THE LAW provide re illegal anchor baby mothers having right to remain. As the De.s might say : simply follow the law.
Finally does this court decision lead to more or less affordability for US citizens particularly if it leads to more babies born to those who are illegally and seek to use that to not be deported and leads to pregnant women coming here illegally to give birth. Again what are the numbers regarding govt outlays or do all these pregnant women pay taxes and on a net basis give more than they take. Just the facts and law please.
You have hit on the most insidious aspect of this ruling.... Anchor Babies!
On the surface the decision is bad and nonsensical but if you look at where it must enevitably lead it is disastrous.
Deport all illegal birthing persons!
Or as Talarico slikes to say "our neighbors with a uterus."
Illegal is such a hurtful word.
😉😉😉😉😉
I'll bet if we taxed the f#%k out of remittances things might be a little different. Also make it so if you are on public assistance as an immigrant, remittances are illegal.
Works for me!
The next step for Progressives will be Anchor Babies.
A SUICIDE PACT
“The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson in Terminiello v. Chicago (1949).
Progressives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 14th Amendment.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Conservatives tend to be Literalist when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
They mock those who are Originalist on this issue.
Guys pick a lane.
Don’t be a hypocrite.
Reading the Constitution literally when it suits you and claiming that it should mean whatever you want it to mean when you don’t like it is hypocritical.
I am an Originalist on ALL of the Constitution.
I care about what the Framers intended…
Not some Literalist reading of it or even worse yet those who talk like a teenager when faced with an Amendment they dislike….. “WHATEVER!”
Suicidal, I am not!
And, if I am found strangled to death just know this…
I DID NOT KILL MYSELF.
“Cherchez la femme”
Alexandre Dumas’s 1854 novel The Mohicans of Paris
Think Hillary!