Originally published at: Trump Asks the Supreme Court to Change What It Means to Be American
The Supreme Court will consider President Trump’s effort to rewrite who gets to be an American citizen Wednesday, an attempt to pervert the Constitution and law that was born in the far-right fever swamp. In Trump v. Barbara, the Trump administration is trying to erase the 14th Amendment’s promise of birthright citizenship to anyone born…
In Biggest Case of the Term, Trump Will Ask the Supreme Court to Change What It Means to Be American
1 Like
How difficult is “All Persons”?
All mean all. Not half, not a quarter, not anything but all.
I am going to love to see how the “originalists” try to say all doesn’t mean all.
2 Likes
not 3/5ths?
3 Likes
When Fredrich Trump, trump’s grandfather, became a naturalized citizen he swore that he no longer had any loyalty to the German government.
After he made his money, he returned to Germany, married, and intended to remain in Germany. However, he was charged with dodging mandatory military service, convicted, stripped of his German citizenship and deported.
You can made the case that his naturalization was invalid because he lied about his loyalties.
If Fredrich Trump was not an American and birthright citizenship is not valid, then his son Fred Trump was German, not American. And Donald Trump would be German and Scot, not American.
1 Like
Unpopular opinion: The 14th Amendment should not be at issue in this case.
It’s a fundamental principle of constitutional jurisprudence that the courts should not get to the constitutional jurisprudence if the case can be decided on other grounds.
Congress has express constitutional authority to decide who is a citizen, and they’ve passed the same law roughly a dozen times since the 14th Amendment providing that all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States. That includes many times of it being passed since Wong Kim Ark made it an undisputed floor for for citizenship under the 14th.
Congress knew about Wong Kim Ark. They legislatively blessed the holding of Wong Kim Ark. Forget the 14th, Congress prevails on this without any further inquiry.
Prediction for late June: Every single one of the Justices will ignore the rule against doing the Constitution where other grounds will provide the outcome.
3 Likes
Don’t forget that Trump’s grandfather made his money in the US illegally, partly by running a brothel. And that would have put him at the head of the deportation list according to the maladministration’s current thinking.
1 Like
So SCOTUS will send this back to Congress to decide?
Just read that Trump plans to attend oral argument tomorrow.
1 Like
He definitely fixates.
1 Like
The Calvinball 6™ has been consistent in ruling in favor of the Tr*mp Administration 90% of the time. It requires 4 of the 9 to hear a case.
The 3 liberal Justices would never have voted to even grant a writ of certiorari. I figure Clarence the crook, strip search Sam and the seat stealer are yes votes for the bigoted felon. Johnny the Robber Baron, the beer drinker and the Handmaid go go either way, although a least one of them voted to hear the case.
What is left out of the discussion is that Congress passed a law in the 1950’s that codified birthright citizenship into federal statue.
The Supremes will twist themselves into a pretzel if they overide it. Unfortunately they are kind of good at that.
2 Likes
You mistake my point. SCOTUS should defer to Congress, but it will forget that it is supposed to do so.
2 Likes
trump plans to beat Iran and fuck nubile supermodels tomorrow. Ain’t none of that happening.
1 Like
Nonsense. They know when and how to shut down bullshit.
And also basically every decade since the 1880s or so.
So he says but even if he knows what that means the performance is doubtful: a show within a show; most likely he will doze off.
We have passed from performative acts into some kind of rhetorical ever-never land; the acts of a fool yet trembling on the brink of real-world consequence and therefore too difficult to laugh off.
“Trump ruined bad taste” ― John Waters
1 Like
Trump should feel lucky to be an American. His Scottish mum coulda opted to live in Canada or Mexico. But I get the strong sense he feels he is somehow better and more deserving than others. That pisses me off at him.and I do hope the Justices will not brook any bullshit from the trump side. These days the law means little or even nothing to trump. He needs his ass burned and burned badly leaving zero doubt it was burned. If he does show up in the audience with the purpose of intimidation I hope he gets dressed down and put in his place. I know I know…it won’t happen…but it should.
1 Like
Vance cites ancestry only to the Civil War. Why stop there? Millions and millions of Americans can trace at least one line of their ancestry (though most probably don’t know it) to the Pilgrims (or a few earlier settlers) and Great Migration Puritans. Not to mention Virginia. I wonder why Vance stops with the CW? (No, I don’t.)
Wikipedia and other sources don’t tell me when Alito’s Italian ancestors arrived here (were all of them Italian or Italian-Americans?). I’d guess in the first two decades or so of the 20th century, but there were other Italians who’d arrived earlier. So, I’m wondering. Were his direct male ancestors all naturalized (their wives’ citizenship dependent on their husbands’, even if said wives were Pilgrim-descended – yes, the law worked that way once) before they had a child who was his director ancestor? Will Alito remain a citizen of the U.S. if he decides to go rogue in deciding this case?
It’s easy to change from a non-birthright to birthright definition of citizenship, as many countries have done in recent decades. Change in the other direction raises crazy questions and problems.
Also, too. I don’t think the defenders of birthright citizenship have been raising this point – they are prudently keeping it simple, I assume. But in case Alito were to try one of his searches for something in witchcraft jurisprudence as historical precedent, I hope the defenders are ready with the argument that in our early Republic, the British practice of birthright citizenship was taken for granted, as it had been in the colonies. The British were unusual then in acknowledging birthright citizenship, but it was the English/British way. So, the 14th Amendment’s aim at former slaves (and free Negroes) is irrelevant to the larger fact that birthright citizenship already existed for others. That amendment was just adding the formerly enslaved to the rolls of people included under the assumption of birthright citizenship.
get rich he will, but fuck anybody? I doubt he has it left in him even with Viagra help. He’s more interested in golfing and in building ballrooms and an arch.
One side of my family arrived in New Orleans in 1815, traveled up the river to Cincinnati and then 40 miles north into wilderness where he established his homestead. It became the farm where I grew up. The other side of my family were in the area of Virginia well before there was a state by that name. Before the Puritans had thought of leaving Europe even.
1 Like
And how exactly did Melania get her green card? H1B visa for lap dances? I think Pam Bondi needs to investigate whether she lied on her visa application. Elon Musk too.