Again concerning birthright citizenship and this one in response to a class action lawsuit which the judge said the SCOTUS suggested was the right way to go about this.
I don't like birthright citizenship. If we had a baby born in Japan while we were there, which we were trying to do but failed due to miscarriage, the baby would not have been a Japanese citizen, s/he would have been a US citizen. I think that's the way it ought to be with babies born here with non-citizen parents. However, I don't think birthright citizenship can be overturned by Executive Order, nor should it be. It will need a change to the law, probably a new amendment. Imagine the chaos if the EO actually results in revoking citizenships of 100s of thousands of Americans and then the next President issues an EO reinstating birthright citizenship. And the next revokes that one, and on and on. Absolute chaos.
I suppose the SCOTUS could rule that the 14th Amendment doesn't mean what it's always been interpreted to mean and overturn birthright citizenship that way. That would be far less chaotic. I'm not hearing or reading any constitutional scholars saying that's likely, but it could be possible. I'd be OK with that if it happens, but don't particularly like the idea of it being done by judicial fiat.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but with all the successful legal squinting and tilting of heads and loophole discovery to rescind laws and Constitutional amendments going on, I wish people advocating for tightening up gun laws could afford the same types of lawyers.
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but with all the successful legal squinting and tilting of heads and loophole discovery to rescind laws and Constitutional amendments going on, I wish people advocating for tightening up gun laws could afford the same types of lawyers.
Be more specific.
These BS generalities serve no point.
The irony is originalists wanting to pick and choose from the original intentions of our founding fathers.Again concerning birthright citizenship and this one in response to a class action lawsuit which the judge said the SCOTUS suggested was the right way to go about this.
I don't like birthright citizenship. If we had a baby born in Japan while we were there, which we were trying to do but failed due to miscarriage, the baby would not have been a Japanese citizen, s/he would have been a US citizen. I think that's the way it ought to be with babies born here with non-citizen parents. However, I don't think birthright citizenship can be overturned by Executive Order, nor should it be. It will need a change to the law, probably a new amendment. Imagine the chaos if the EO actually results in revoking citizenships of 100s of thousands of Americans and then the next President issues an EO reinstating birthright citizenship. And the next revokes that one, and on and on. Absolute chaos.
Be more specific.
These BS generalities serve no point.
To be more blunt, I wish there were stricter gun laws on the books. I wish the second amendment wasn't such a third rail of politics and I wish the type of political maneuvering to rescind things like Roe v Wade or birthright citizenship was able to be successfully applied to tweaking and/or making the second amendment more restrictive.
@ohio-guy Those methods are available. And it has nothing to do with having good lawyers. The gun control people have good lawyers.
Again concerning birthright citizenship and this one in response to a class action lawsuit which the judge said the SCOTUS suggested was the right way to go about this.
I don't like birthright citizenship. If we had a baby born in Japan while we were there, which we were trying to do but failed due to miscarriage, the baby would not have been a Japanese citizen, s/he would have been a US citizen. I think that's the way it ought to be with babies born here with non-citizen parents. However, I don't think birthright citizenship can be overturned by Executive Order, nor should it be. It will need a change to the law, probably a new amendment. Imagine the chaos if the EO actually results in revoking citizenships of 100s of thousands of Americans and then the next President issues an EO reinstating birthright citizenship. And the next revokes that one, and on and on. Absolute chaos.
This will be easily overturned as all the others have been and exactly as Alito prophesied.
https://twitter.com/CalebBurdett18/status/1940514606486900806?t=kIc7DFsRdYahrlPA9C1KtA&s=19
@dbmhoosier Why is it an abuse of Rule 23? Which element is not met?
Well for one the class includes unidentified people including "future persons". Likely violated 23a as the class must be clearly defined. Lack of commonality as well as the individual circumstances are often different.
Rule 23b2 also requires uniformity of harm which almost certainly isn't the case here and individualized relief is required.
SCOTUS will reverse.
@dbmhoosier Why is it an abuse of Rule 23? Which element is not met?
LOL. Surely there's a tweet out there explaining it.
@dbmhoosier Why is it an abuse of Rule 23? Which element is not met?
Well for one the class includes unidentified people including "future persons". Likely violated 23a as the class must be clearly defined. Lack of commonality as well as the individual circumstances are often different.
Rule 23b2 also requires uniformity of harm which almost certainly isn't the case here and individualized relief is required.
SCOTUS will reverse.
So there's no commonality among newborns born to non-citizens? And the harm to them -- all of them born in the US -- isn't uniform?
Be more specific.
These BS generalities serve no point.
To be more blunt, I wish there were stricter gun laws on the books. I wish the second amendment wasn't such a third rail of politics and I wish the type of political maneuvering to rescind things like Roe v Wade or birthright citizenship was able to be successfully applied to tweaking and/or making the second amendment more restrictive.
The Democratic Party began the process of losing its ability to affect major national issues in the 1980s when it transformed itself from a political party for the people to a political lobbyist for certain social causes.
This transformation completed itself as the DNP attached itself to radical issues such as LGTPQXYNZQ and the loss of political power was complete with the 3 to 6 margin in the Supreme Court.
Darwinism at its best: Survival of the fittest
Be more specific.
These BS generalities serve no point.
To be more blunt, I wish there were stricter gun laws on the books. I wish the second amendment wasn't such a third rail of politics and I wish the type of political maneuvering to rescind things like Roe v Wade or birthright citizenship was able to be successfully applied to tweaking and/or making the second amendment more restrictive.
As far as Roe. It was widely considered a poor decision, even by abortion advocates like RBG. It stood through the decades because we have always had a leftist SCOTUS up until Trump's first term.
The only maneuvering done was new Justices got appointed, applied the constitution and a bad decision was reversed as it inevitably was going to.
The second amendment is airtight. So there is no maneuvering to be done. Birthright has some wiggle room but Trump's attempts will likely get him nowhere.
@dbmhoosier the first one is a good criticism. The others are not, in my opinion.