You must log in or # to comment.
The fact that this was even a case they heard indicates a failure of the system. The text of the amendment is unambiguous and unmisinterpretable. The fact that these four decided they should rule based on what they think the Constitution should say instead of what it literally says should be reason enough to have them removed from their positions.
Imagine a future Supreme Court deciding that the founding fathers would have wanted guns banned if they knew what modern weapons looked like, or that they meant to have the government endorse the Catholic church. Literal text of the document be damned, the Supreme Court rules based on what they want it to say. Tantamount to treason, and they ought to be tried as such.
Hold up there, while I agree that birthright citizenship is pretty clear cut, interpreting words is literally the essence of the law. The methodology is similar to all studies of the arts, be it theology, philosophy or the law. You argue and discuss your interpretation by looking at the system of the law, the history of when it was written and explanations to why it was written as well as what the writers intended for the law to mean. That naturally changes over the years
The irony is that Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas are (in)famous for being the most textualist of the judges, where they pride themselves on not interpreting the words, and instead follow the law as it is written.
Except for the clear cut case of birthright citizenship.
Ah I see, well to be fair us legal doctrine is not really much more than fancy word juggling in my opinion anyway
Sure thing.
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.
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. There is absolutely no room for interpreting these words. Children of illegal immigrants are subject to our jurisdiction, and are therefore citizens.
Like I said, in this case it is very clear. I was just opposing the statement that interpreting the law would be unlawful
In on your side friend just looking for more citations
For bad scotus decisions or something more specific?
All of it friend
I haven’t read this yet, but the dude’s a friend and he’s usually right on the money with his legal analyses reading it right now actually
is that what you were looking for?
Nah
Don’t know how to help you if you don’t ask
You good but preachin to the choir
These are all Trump’s island buddies and of course they try to please the pedo in command.
uncle ruckus hates his own people.
His name being Thomas is like Dump’s batman villain pool guy having a company called Greenwater. Satirists these days are dead
It was four not three Brett Kavanaugh also has said the 14th only applies for those that are American citizens and that it was Federal Law that Trump broke not the constitution.
Pretty sure Gryfdindor is getting an RV and some luxury vacations.
and being the favorite collectible of a nazi billionaire.
i dont think i ever seen rowling had a black character rin her books, she likely doesnt want them in there if they arnt a stereotype.
Oh, she did. He was called Kingsley Shacklebolt, because actually calling him Civil Rights Slavery was a little too on the nose.
They were on the island and there are blackmail videos. … that’s why.
I’d have expected Roberts or Kavanaugh before Gorsuch. I’m just glad they didn’t join the dissent.
Kavanaugh voted with them on the Constitution stating that it was only federal law that was broken.
I had money on Barrett, but only because I forgot about Gorsuck. Knew Uncle Tom would be one of the three though
probably too much attention on the scotus/president right now. i guaranteed they will try this when everyone is distracted again.
I wish them a very
[]Fuck off all the
Mentioning JK properties promotes transphobia.
The witch only disappears when we all stop acknowledging her.
So referencing Harry Potter empowers the TERFs?
Why does this sound familiar?
It’s weird how, in reading the later books or watching the movies, you realize that you can replace mudblood with any other slur and it is the same story that’s been told many times in history.
It’s weirder how you can replace mudblood with queer or transfem,
It’s weirder how JK is fucking Dolores Umbridge (who is honestly one of my most hated characters in literature) in that world.
Jesus Christ, man. No one cares and this has nothing to do with either of those things.
guess I’m no one.
I’m sorry. I didn’t say it. But I know that when I get frustrated I get sloppy and say hurtful things. a lot.
I see you. And I care.
❤️
Please advise which cases
Those three ruled in favor of doing away with birthright citizenship.
Trash
