Supreme Court Appears "Skeptical" of Trump's Completely-Correct Arguments on Birthright Citizenship<br>Plus: Trump to Sign EO Cracking Down on Illegal Mail-In Voting

Supreme Court Appears "Skeptical" of Trump's Completely-Correct Arguments on Birthright Citizenship
Plus: Trump to Sign EO Cracking Down on Illegal Mail-In Voting

Of course. Republicans nominate liberals to the Supreme Court, recommended by the fake conservatives of the Federalist Society.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday mostly appeared skeptical of the Trump administration's argument to end birthright citizenship for babies born to parents who are not U.S. citizens.
Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued Wednesday before the high court, with President Trump in attendance, that birthright citizenship "rewards illegal immigration" and urged the justices to rule that the children of temporary visitors and illegal immigrants should not be deemed as citizens at birth, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Most of the justices, on the 9-member bench, said the Constitution had been interpreted for more than a century to grant citizenship to "all persons born" in the U.S., regardless of the citizenship status of their parents.
Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett said the 19th-century debates over citizenship focused on newborns, not their parents' legal status.
"In none of the debates are parents discussed," Gorsuch said.

Of course the liberal woman and libertarian sissy are defecting, as usual.

Barrett said the 14th Amendment's framers declared a "new type of American citizenship. ... They don't focus on the parents. They focus on the child."

So she's already gone -- she's stating that she already knows exactly what the 14th Amendment means.

Justice Elena Kagan told Sauer that he was seeking a major revision in longstanding law.
"Birthright citizenship has been the rule for a very long time," she said. Because of this, she said, why "accept this revisionist history?"
...
Sauer argued in response that this understanding of birthright citizenship had been wrong from the beginning.
He said the citizenship rule did not extend to the children of immigrants and visitors who were "subject to a foreign power," as those people did not have "allegiance" to the U.S.
Chief Justice John Roberts was also skeptical, saying, "It's a new world, but it is the same Constitution."

And there you go. The Grim Troika again.

You can listen to live arguments here, if you can take it. Go to the right sidebar and scroll down to Wednesday's arguments. (I can't link it directly.)

Trump is ready to sign another EO, which our corrupt liberal Supreme Court will probably strike down because they don't want to stop Democrats from openly stealing elections.

President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order Tuesday cracking down on mail-in voting across the country, the Daily Caller learned first.
The executive order will require the Secretary of Homeland Security to create a list of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state with the Social Security Administration's help, according to a fact sheet shared with the Caller. The presidential action will also require that the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) only send absentee ballots to those on each state's approved mail-in ballot list. Ballots will now have specific secure envelopes, with unique barcodes for tracking, the order mandates.
States will be provided with their revised list of confirmed voters no less than 60 days before each federal election under the order.

The executive order also tells the U.S. Attorney General to prioritize investigating and prosecuting anyone accused of sending ballots to ineligible voters, the Caller learned. States that disobey the order may lose federal funds under the presidential action.

...
The action comes as the U.S. Senate continues to debate the SAVE America Act. Under the legislation, voters would be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship and ID, states would be required to clean up their voter rolls and approved reasons for mail-in ballots would be restricted.

Posted by: Disinformation Expert Ace at 03:40 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 FIRST!!!!!

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:40 PM (Zz0t1)

2 When The Blade strikes FIRST, he strikes FIRST

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 03:40 PM (iFTx/)

3 Heh.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:41 PM (Zz0t1)

4 .
Supreme Court ... so many cunts, so little penis.

Posted by: Marooned at April 01, 2026 03:42 PM (kt8QE)

5 I have to watch "The Purge."

I think with a few modifications, it could be a kick-ass Executive Order.

Posted by: Stateless - Day 13 of 14 or so - extreme dog care at April 01, 2026 03:42 PM (Sco7b)

6 I heard Robert's quote above on the radio news break. That told me all I need to know about where this was going.

Posted by: Turn 2 at April 01, 2026 03:42 PM (CyFyf)

7 Howz my ass taste?

Posted by: Amy Coney Island at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (Zz0t1)

8 Okay.. The babies can stay but the illegal parents have to go....

Posted by: It's me donna at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (eANu3)

9 It’s DOA, Jim.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (pDt9x)

10 I mean...I suppose the motions must be gone through.

Posted by: Brother Tim (102mm/W59), Keeper of the Tim Continuum at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (OUMaO)

11 Things sure don't sound rosy about the outcome. That's from many sources I've been reading today.

Posted by: Lady in Black at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (qBdHI)

12 "But if we don't let the Demoncrats win, we won't get millions in lobbyist funds and gifts!"

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (iXqHn)

13 6-3.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (pDt9x)

14 I roll up The Constitution and snort coke through it.

Posted by: Cheap Justice John Roberts at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (Zz0t1)

15 BabylonBee: Trump Presidential Library To Feature Solemn 'Reflecting Pool' Of Liberal Tears

Posted by: SMOD at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (RHGPo)

16 I guess the Constitution got it all wrong then

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (Ia/+0)

17 No way Amy Barrett goes for it. It's too "mean."

Posted by: brak at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (jGJov)

18 This doesn't strike me as an issue that will be resolved through the "standard means". Whatever those are anymore.

Posted by: Brother Tim (102mm/W59), Keeper of the Tim Continuum at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (OUMaO)

19 They don't focus on the parents. They focus on the child."
---
That is flat out twaddle.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (Fi81e)

20 "Supreme Court Appears "Skeptical" of Trump's Completely-Correct Arguments on Birthright Citizenship"

Translation: We ain't touching this with a 20 foot pole, no way, no how.

Posted by: Mister Scott (Formerly GWS) at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (0N4FZ)

21 Roberts should get an axe handle across the back of the head for saying 'it's a New World.'

No. It really isn't. This stupid shit has been going on for 1000s of years. Same people. Same arguments. Same power struggles. Thinking you are new and unique is at the heart of modern thought and it is verifiable false. Your ideas are not new. The tech changes but the people stay the same.

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (zZu0s)

22 I eat vag.

Posted by: Justice Elena Kagan at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (Zz0t1)

23 We’ll see.

Posted by: Cow Demon at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM (nqStX)

24 I had no doubts on this one.

Posted by: steevy at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (YwEeS)

25 they're not ruling on this until June at the earliest

so maybe better to try to enjoy the spring while we can lol

(I also heard it might take until October for a ruling)

I still think they split the baby. some restrictions going forward, all existing grandfathered

Posted by: BlackOrchid(j+aD2) at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (j+aD2)

26 As soon as the Marxists take over after the next 2 vote fraud we will be living in the Camp of the Saints

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (Ia/+0)

27 GatewayPundit had thks argument from DEI hire Jackson.

"In the warped world of the radical left, being subject to criminal prosecution is now the same thing as the “allegiance” required for birthright citizenship.

Jackson laid out a convoluted hypothetical involving a trip to Japan.

Her argument? If she steals a wallet in Tokyo and gets arrested, she is suddenly “owing allegiance” to the Japanese sovereign.

“If I steal someone’s wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me. It’s allegiance, meaning can they control you as a matter of law?” Jackson posited. “So there’s this relationship based on even though I’m a temporary traveler… I’m still locally owing allegiance in that sense.”"

Posted by: Stateless - Day 13 of 14 or so - extreme dog care at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (Sco7b)

28 I'm just waiting for the Affirmative Action Jackson highlight real.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:46 PM (Zz0t1)

29 Let's get real.

The odds of any Supreme Court in the 21st century -- short of a wet-dream Court of five Clarence Thomases and four Sam Alitos -- ruling against birthright citizenship are .... zero-point-zero. Maybe less than that.

The best we could have ever hoped for was a punt.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 03:46 PM (iFTx/)

30 24 I had no doubts on this one.
Posted by: steevy at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (YwEeS)

Yeah, foregone decision. It would take balls, big brass balls for a change in the matter. And this court lacks balls.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:46 PM (pDt9x)

31 8 Okay.. The babies can stay but the illegal parents have to go....

Posted by: It's me donna at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (eANu3)

wisdom of solomon here

Posted by: moki at April 01, 2026 03:46 PM (wLjpr)

32 31 8 Okay.. The babies can stay but the illegal parents have to go....

Posted by: It's me donna at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (eANu3)

wisdom of solomon here

Posted by: moki at April 01, 2026 03:46 PM (wLjpr

Agreed. Each parent gets half.

Posted by: Stateless - Day 13 of 14 or so - extreme dog care at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (Sco7b)

33 They rule on cases that are controversial until the kast day that they can run away for vacation

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (Ia/+0)

34 This is just the beginning. The only decision the Court can make to end this debate is to simply agree with the Trump position. It won't. But the side that thinks birthright citizenship is not just wrong, but ludicrous, will not just go away. If anything, it may harden the political debate. The Court cannot settle something like this. All they can do is delay it.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (sX1BW)

35 Okay.. The babies can stay but the illegal parents have to go....
Posted by: It's me donna at April 01, 2026 03:43 PM (eANu3)

IF the baby is considered a citizen, it's a minor, so.......

It goes with the parents when they're deported. The child can come back when it's 18 as an adult citizen. No family riding the coattails.

But I still think the child shouldn't be a citizen from birth just because.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (Zz0t1)

36 Cuck the Supreme Fork!

Posted by: Joe Mama at April 01, 2026 03:49 PM (TezPK)

37 I eat vag.
Posted by: Justice Elena Kagan at April 01, 2026 03:44 PM

I believe the term is vagitarian.

Or dyke. Take your pick.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at April 01, 2026 03:49 PM (bFu5X)

38 34 This is just the beginning. The only decision the Court can make to end this debate is to simply agree with the Trump position. It won't. But the side that thinks birthright citizenship is not just wrong, but ludicrous, will not just go away. If anything, it may harden the political debate. The Court cannot settle something like this. All they can do is delay it.

I agree SH

this has shone a light on something most people had zero idea about

it's moving the needle

Posted by: BlackOrchid(j+aD2) at April 01, 2026 03:49 PM (j+aD2)

39 These are the two biggest issues
- birthright citizenship
- secure elections.

If Trump can fix these, now, I have hope.

If not? I think things will have to get a lot worse before they get better,.

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at April 01, 2026 03:49 PM (Fg7bI)

40 I believe the term is vagitarian.

Or dyke. Take your pick.
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at April 01, 2026 03:49 PM (bFu5X)

Lesbian dinosaur.

a.k.a Likalotapus

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (Zz0t1)

41 John Robert’s stars in The Manchurian Candidate

Posted by: The Dog at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (rzQeJ)

42 Probably the greatest abuse of thr justice system has been Trump and associates being persecuted in manifestly corrupt proceedings.

Federalist Society? A OK with them, never wrote one article about it.

They're just a bunch of big business toady assholes.

Posted by: MAGA_Ken at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (ZVE1T)

43 How is a brand new born baby "subject to " ANY "jurisdiction"??! It doesn't know what country it's even in. The idea of a country is going to have to be taught to it much later.

And what laws can a newborn break?

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (Fi81e)

44 Maybe just maybe all of this was to get another high profile issue for the midterms, and going forward to 28. Twould be a good one.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (pDt9x)

45 This would be an excellent ruling to go into "The court has given their opinion, now let them enforce it" mode.

Posted by: Methos at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM (vSvIl)

46 Whig - you had responded to an earlier post and then life got busy. I was aware of the earlier 19th century case, but even in that case the justices ignored a great deal of legislative history on what was meant, or so I have read.

My impression is that subsequent court cases built off that ruling, extending the error of the interpretation of the 14th. Clearly the legislature understood by the 1920s law regarding American Indians they needed to pass a law clarifying this topic. I am unaware of any further legislative action agreeing to universal birthright citizenship. It seems it all came from the Courts reading of the 14th, meaning the legislature will not be able to just pass a new law, because a law cannot override an amendment. By all rights, the 1920s law should have been unconstitutional, because it assumed they were not citizens even though they were most certainly born here.

Posted by: Black JEM at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (GZYu7)

47 what if PDJT can at least partially fix those two issues bob?

he is trying, he is moving the needle, he has the entirety of our soviet-style govt arrayed against him and yet he's making things happen

and everything is out in the open now

change is coming. maybe we're just in glasnost time now, not quite there yet

Posted by: BlackOrchid(j+aD2) at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (j+aD2)

48 Thats not the way it workd in japan in fact koreans in japan are second class citizens

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (bXbFr)

49 Lesbian dinosaur.

a.k.a Likalotapus
Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:50 PM

*snort*

I forgot about that one.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (bFu5X)

50 Johnny put his finger in the dyke and saved the town.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (Zz0t1)

51 "The constitution is not a suicide pact, making citizens of our enemies."

"It is, if we say it is. This is a 'new type of American citizenship' "

-- SCOTUS

Posted by: JM in Illinois at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (YU46W)

52 Maybe just maybe all of this was to get another high profile issue for the midterms, and going forward to 28. Twould be a good one.

-------------

This could be a silver lining. Especially if people see Trump is fighting for this. This is type of issue that could move people to vote.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (sX1BW)

53
*snort*

I forgot about that one.
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (bFu5X)

I help where I can.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:51 PM (Zz0t1)

54 Roe was the law of the land for a very long time.
The Chevron Doctrine was the law of the land for a very long time.
Slavery was the law of the land for a very long time.

Bad law doesn't magically age into to good law.

Also, I thought everyone knew it's stupid to try and read the tea leaves of what justices ask in oral argument.
Especially since, often, they play devil's advocate to try and reason through the opposing argument.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at April 01, 2026 03:52 PM (HXT0k)

55 >>>"In the warped world of the radical left, being subject to criminal prosecution is now the same thing as the “allegiance” required for birthright citizenship.

DEI hire mindset

Posted by: brak at April 01, 2026 03:52 PM (jGJov)

56 There is something wrong that Jumanji Jemimah Jackson gets more than enough money to live on for the rest of her life, but my job is falling below the cost of living.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:52 PM (iXqHn)

57 We are just in a quiet reprieve until the next dem prez opens the floodgates again.

Sure looking back from 50 years ago until now, we are a very different country, but I think 50 years from now is very precarious. I fear for the world my kids will live in.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 03:52 PM (n5tGW)

58 56 There is something wrong that Jumanji Jemimah Jackson gets more than enough money to live on for the rest of her life, but my job is falling below the cost of living.
Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:52 PM (iXqHn)

You must not have your mind right, or the right connections.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:53 PM (pDt9x)

59 35 IF the baby is considered a citizen, it's a minor, so.......

It goes with the parents when they're deported. The child can come back when it's 18 as an adult citizen. No family riding the coattails.

But I still think the child shouldn't be a citizen from birth just because.
Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (Zz0t1)

The child should have to stay so it cannot be indoctrinated in the other country's supremacy narratives.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:53 PM (iXqHn)

60 Illegals are super important to the ruling class. The Supreme Court is a bulwark of the ruling class. It stands to reason that they'll defend illegals with the ferocity all other ruling class institutions have.

*shrugs*

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at April 01, 2026 03:54 PM (BI5O2)

61
THere's some green on the radar rolling over the cape -- a little bit, but they think it will be out of there by launch time.

And I can't take that NASA official broadcast anymore. The grrrrrl power is just insufferable. Talking silly shit half the time.

Posted by: publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb) at April 01, 2026 03:54 PM (w6EFb)

62 We always argue how "it is the same constitution" regarding free speech and arms, and it makes sense.

But in the 18th century, if you were born in a place you existed in that place, likely for all your life. Crossing the Atlantic was dangerous, time consuming and expensive. It was just a wholly different issue.

Today we have Chinese flying to CA (or Mariana Islands) and becoming citizens. They can now vote. *Their kids can be citizens too* So can their grandkids,etc. What can not go on forever can not go on forever. This either ends at the SCOTUS, or in the future when 1,000,000 chinese nationals with US citizenship take over our elections and country.

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at April 01, 2026 03:54 PM (Fg7bI)

63 “If I steal someone’s wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me. It’s allegiance, meaning can they control you as a matter of law?” Jackson posited. “So there’s this relationship based on even though I’m a temporary traveler… I’m still locally owing allegiance in that sense.”"

Posted by: Stateless - Day 13 of 14 or so - extreme dog care at April 01, 2026 03:45 PM (Sco7b)
---
I knew somebody would make that asinine case.

But here's the thing, if anytime you go to another country you are "subject to their jurisdiction", why would that be something that needs to be specified?

That phrase is simply being carried along as a reference to its meaning before the 14th amendment.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 03:55 PM (Fi81e)

64 Sure, whatever you say, Jasmine:

Jasmine Crockett
@JasmineForUS
·
2h
The meltdown over Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is truly something EVERYONE needs to pay attention to. You see, as the first & only black woman to ever serve on the court, she had to be 10 times better than most… She continues to flex her brilliance in oral arguments & many dissents.

Please note that by the time a black woman ascends to a powerful position, she Definitely Earned It… if you have any questions… let’s talk about Senator, now Secretary Mullin… or please pull the resumes of some of the other justices before entering this chat… actually just don’t, it’s not a debate, these are FACTS (alternative facts = LIES).

Posted by: beckster at April 01, 2026 03:56 PM (kX27y)

65 The child should have to stay so it cannot be indoctrinated in the other country's supremacy narratives.
Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:53 PM (iXqHn)

Forced adoption?

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)

66 I couple mor Cultural Marxists on the court and we are finished

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 03:56 PM (Ia/+0)

67 My belief that even the bullshit that Jumanji spouts is not her own bullshit, but that of her danger hair law clerks given to her in her Show Prep.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:57 PM (pDt9x)

68
The child should have to stay so it cannot be indoctrinated in the other country's supremacy narratives.
Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:53 PM (iXqHn)

I have no problem with seizing babies from expelled foreigners, and raising them as Americans. It's perhaps the only way we can profit from these foreign barbarians - as long as we're extremely discriminating about who can adopt.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at April 01, 2026 03:57 PM (BI5O2)

69 Chief Justice John Roberts was also skeptical, saying, "It's a new world, but it is the same Constitution."

So you stick with the same Constitution dipshit.
Otherwise, we can invalidate large swaths of the Constitution.

Posted by: rickb223 at April 01, 2026 03:57 PM (sUjod)

70 Sure, whatever you say, Jasmine:

Jasmine Crockett
@JasmineForUS
·
2h
The meltdown over Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is truly something EVERYONE needs to pay attention to. You see, as the first & only black woman to ever serve on the court, she had to be 10 times better than most… She continues to flex her brilliance in oral arguments & many dissents.

Please note that by the time a black woman ascends to a powerful position, she Definitely Earned It… if you have any questions… let’s talk about Senator, now Secretary Mullin… or please pull the resumes of some of the other justices before entering this chat… actually just don’t, it’s not a debate, these are FACTS (alternative facts = LIES).
Posted by: beckster at April 01, 2026 03:56 PM (kX27y)
_______

Who?

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 03:57 PM (iFTx/)

71 holy smokes, she's not even 1/10 as good as most.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 03:58 PM (n5tGW)

72 @JasmineForUS
·
2h
The meltdown over Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is truly something EVERYONE needs to pay attention to. You see, as the first & only black woman to ever serve on the court, she had to be 10 times better than most… She continues to flex her brilliance in oral arguments & many dissents.

Seriously, I think she leans very heavily on the 'baffle 'em with your bullshit' than the 'dazzle 'em with your brilliance.'

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:58 PM (Zz0t1)

73 It's a new world, but it is the same Constitution.

---------------

A Constitution that was able to adapt to include gay marriage. Convenient.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 03:58 PM (sX1BW)

74 The people who gladly redefined marriage, the oldest institution in history, are now going to pretend that changing something that has been "the rule for a very long time" is a problem for them.

Posted by: 29Victor at April 01, 2026 03:58 PM (0MjtC)

75 Jasmine Cricket never disappoints.

Posted by: tubal at April 01, 2026 03:59 PM (pDt9x)

76 Jasmine Crockett
@JasmineForUS

Please note that by the time a black woman ascends to a powerful position, she Definitely Earned It

Posted by: beckster at April 01, 2026 03:56 PM (kX27y)

It'd be a nice change of pace if we could choose the color of smoke that gets blown up our asses...

Posted by: Stateless - Day 13 of 14 or so - extreme dog care at April 01, 2026 03:59 PM (Sco7b)

77 Doesn't help having John Sauer, with his "Wally Cox" voice, arguing for our side.

Posted by: Joemarine at April 01, 2026 04:00 PM (y171U)

78 The people who gladly redefined marriage, the oldest institution in history, are now going to pretend that changing something that has been "the rule for a very long time" is a problem for them.

Posted by: 29Victor at April 01, 2026 03:58 PM (0MjtC)
---
They have no standards. It's any port in a storm.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:00 PM (Fi81e)

79 I'll also note on this matter, that nearly everyone who is commenting, especially in the mainstream news, have been getting their analysis from the media.

And the media (and the left) are all offended this is even a question.
So every framing starts with the (to them) obvious assumption that the Court has to rule 9-0 on this.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at April 01, 2026 04:01 PM (HXT0k)

80 his voice? sheesh

I'm sure you're James Earl Jones over there

Mr Sauer did a fantastic job today

Posted by: BlackOrchid(j+aD2) at April 01, 2026 04:02 PM (j+aD2)

81 Shes still here, go home cardi c-

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 04:02 PM (bXbFr)

82 It will be better times when Jasmine Crockett goes away.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 04:02 PM (Zz0t1)

83 I'm close to becoming African-American pilled.

Posted by: Chairborne!...Desk From Above! at April 01, 2026 04:02 PM (tWc/t)

84 79 I'll also note on this matter, that nearly everyone who is commenting, especially in the mainstream news, have been getting their analysis from the media.

that's incredibly obvious Peoples Hippo!

lol whatever

doom patrol activated here as per normal

Posted by: BlackOrchid(j+aD2) at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (j+aD2)

85 82 It will be better times when Jasmine Crockett goes away.
---------------
And High Speed Train arrives.

Posted by: pudinhead at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (n17eQ)

86 61
THere's some green on the radar rolling over the cape -- a little bit, but they think it will be out of there by launch time.

And I can't take that NASA official broadcast anymore. The grrrrrl power is just insufferable. Talking silly shit half the time.
Posted by: publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb) at April 01, 2026 03:54 PM (w6EFb)

Publius, it is bad when the silly sh** takes over.

Posted by: Joemarine at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (y171U)

87 It's a new world, but it is the same Constitution.

---------------

A Constitution that was able to adapt to include gay marriage. Convenient.
Posted by: SH

And the internet and infringing on an enumerated right that specifically says "shall not be infringed".

Posted by: rickb223 at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (sUjod)

88 IF the baby is considered a citizen, it's a minor, so.......

It goes with the parents when they're deported. The child can come back when it's 18 as an adult citizen. No family riding the coattails.

But I still think the child shouldn't be a citizen from birth just because.
Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM (Zz0t1)

The child should have to stay so it cannot be indoctrinated in the other country's supremacy narratives.
Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 03:53 PM (iXqHn)
____

Who is gonna raise these kids in the USA? Serious question. These illegal births are generally poor migrants with no roots in the USA. If we send the parents packing, then who is gonna raise the kids? Sure, adoption is an option, but I'll guarantee that "poor brown child of illegals" doesn't rank high on adoptive parents' wish lists.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (iFTx/)

89 The ones whi though trump could order seal team 6 to kill opponents

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 04:04 PM (bXbFr)

90 Any non-citizen female wishing to enter the country must submit to a pregnancy test when she is deloused and vaccinated before entry. Once on US soil, she will be fitted with a special Elite Hunting dentata proven effective at youth hostels in Slovakia.

Posted by: Kam Fong as Chin Ho at April 01, 2026 04:04 PM (GPa4z)

91 "In none of the debates are parents discussed," Gorsuch said.

_______________________

Sauer handled this rather well by pointing out that Courts never validly addressed the issue. They treated the concept as the "third rail."

Posted by: Orson at April 01, 2026 04:04 PM (dIske)

92 If we send the parents packing, then who is gonna raise the kids?
-----------------
We give them to the trannies and gayz. They will become service animals.

Posted by: pudinhead at April 01, 2026 04:04 PM (n17eQ)

93 Chief Justice John Roberts was also skeptical, saying, "It's a new world, but it is the same Constitution."

==

In other words, it's a tax. Pvsshy...

Posted by: runner at April 01, 2026 04:05 PM (GD0B3)

94 I wish someone would come in to one of these USSC circle jerks and outright accuse the court of being a political entity. One that keeps arrogating Executive and Legislative powers to themselves.
What is supposed to be the redress for that? Wait for one of the judges to drop dead and then put your own guy on the court?
What if we don’t want to wait that long?
It probably won’t go over too well.

Posted by: Dr. Claw at April 01, 2026 04:05 PM (jbnUc)

95 That was a very lame argiment on roberts part

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 04:05 PM (bXbFr)

96 Let's just end this charade and have the SC declare everyone on planet fucking earth a US citizen.

Posted by: Chairborne!...Desk From Above! at April 01, 2026 04:06 PM (tWc/t)

97 Who is gonna raise these kids in the USA? Serious question. These illegal births are generally poor migrants with no roots in the USA. If we send the parents packing, then who is gonna raise the kids? Sure, adoption is an option, but I'll guarantee that "poor brown child of illegals" doesn't rank high on adoptive parents' wish lists.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 04:03 PM (iFTx/)
==
Interesting question, but I don't think you are necessarily correct.

Posted by: Black JEM at April 01, 2026 04:06 PM (GZYu7)

98 84 79 I'll also note on this matter, that nearly everyone who is commenting, especially in the mainstream news, have been getting their analysis from the media.

It's a way to backdoor pressure the judges to "meet the public's expectations" which themselves have now been set by the media...

As for the case...children are minors...they can't be subject to the jurisdiction...only their parents can. It would have been an interesting question, and maybe it was asked, if biological parents birth the child here, and then abandon it to the adoption system, could that child solely have citizenship. As in, as long as the parents go home and stay home in their previous country, they could have a baby to grow here (as long as the baby was adopted by US parents)...they themselves just get no bennies ever from the baby's birth location...it's like the reverse of Hollywood taking babies from overseas, but overseas giving them here...

Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (tOcjL)

99 So, Jackson explained why the Left won’t deport criminals: they are citizens by way of prosecution.

Posted by: Accomack at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (8jVAy)

100 This is just the beginning. The only decision the Court can make to end this debate is to simply agree with the Trump position. It won't. But the side that thinks birthright citizenship is not just wrong, but ludicrous, will not just go away. If anything, it may harden the political debate. The Court cannot settle something like this. All they can do is delay it.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 03:48 PM

What bugs me is why did SCOTUS take the case if they are so skeptical? They could have punted and let stand the lower court rulings that said anyone born here is a citizen no matter what but they did not do that and chose to take the case.

I suspect they are going to try and twist the language of the 14th amendment into something bizarre.

Posted by: Mister Scott (Formerly GWS) at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (0N4FZ)

101 Stupid line from Roberts, this is the guy that agreed we should change the definition of marriage that we had for thousands of years.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (n5tGW)

102 Bonhomme, the news you posted in the previous thread about the Nepal tourist scam is horrible.

On the one hand, someone rich enough to hike Mt. Everest possibly has the money to pay that. Maybe. On the other hand, making someone sick on a dangerous mountain on purpose just to swindle them of more money is beyond evil.

Posted by: LizLem at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (GSsFn)

103 Adding to my comment above, another big category of alien births is "birth tourism," but that's generally for rich foreigners who are generally here legally (on tourism visas or whatever). Many from China. Surprisingly, many then take the kid back to their country, at least until the kid is 18. They want US citizenship and passports for the kids, but not necessarily to raise here in USA.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at April 01, 2026 04:07 PM (iFTx/)

104 That was a very lame argiment on roberts part
Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 04:05 PM (bXbFr)

Lame? No way. How do you do, fellow kids?

Posted by: John Roberts at April 01, 2026 04:08 PM (Zz0t1)

105 "The Grim Troika again."
speaking of gratuitous bunghole-fingering...

Maybe kbj can figure this one out?

Posted by: Cock of the Walk at April 01, 2026 04:08 PM (yxZ54)

106 Any non-citizen female wishing to enter the country must submit to a pregnancy test

-------------

And why shouldn't that be the rule? If the Court says US birth is all that is needed, then this is a very common sense rule. Unfortunately, only enforceable if you have a Trump as president. But still.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:08 PM (sX1BW)

107 I have no idea why tourists go to the third world.

Crazy story out of Nepal:
Trekking company owners, helicopter operators, hospital executives, and mountain guides have all been caught in a dangerous scam. The guides put baking soda in the tourist's food. This gives the poisoned tourist severe gastric distress. The guides and medical teams then pressure them to evacuate by an expensive ride via helicopter to the local hospital. The hospital then falsely identifies the gastric distress as altitude sickness. Everybody profits at the expense of the tourist.

http://tiny.cc/xp71101

Posted by: bonhomme at April 01, 2026 04:08 PM (mkw2N)

108 Clay Travis wondered if mail in ballots will be sent to China so the tourist babies can vote in our elections. Millions and millions of anchor baby votes.

Posted by: Joemarine at April 01, 2026 04:09 PM (y171U)

109 NPR, Gentlemen and Lady Gentlemen:

"The Artemis II mission crew contains four people — including one woman and one Black man, both of whom will be the first on a lunar mission. But NASA hasn't been talking about these milestones much.

Language celebrating this diversity has largely disappeared from NASA's website and rhetoric since Trump took office. He signed an executive order directing federal agencies to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The first Black astronaut to travel into space was Guion Bluford. He flew on the space shuttle Challenger in 1983. Since then, there have been other notable Black people in space, such as Mae Jemison or Leland Melvin. But these names aren't nearly as established in American folklore as moon walkers Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin from the 1960s.

The homogeneity of the Astronaut Corps - all white, Christian men, married with children, jet test piloting experience - was seen at the time as hallmark of the exclusivity of the program."

Posted by: one hour sober at April 01, 2026 04:09 PM (Y1sOo)

110 If a foreigner goes on a murdering spree and the cops try to arrest him--see--he's "subject to the jurisdiction" unless we simply let him go on killing until he's all killed out.

Lesson: Don't enforce laws unless you want to make a new person "subject to your jurisdiction".

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:09 PM (Fi81e)

111 So Johnnie Bobbie has been long vying for Worst Chief Justice Ever but has been stymied by Roger B. Taney. Voila! THIS can be his Dred Scott!! A decision so stupid that a vicious war breaks out and ultimately his brain-dead ruling is overturned.

Good for you, Johnnie! You persevered and TOOK THE CROWN!!!

Posted by: lurk at April 01, 2026 04:09 PM (h0JFh)

112 Amy coney Barrett only sides with us on issues of religious freedom, women's issues, and children's protections, because she's female catholic and has kids. But those are important issues.

This case deals with foreign kids and she has adopted foreign kids, so not sure which way she'll land.

Posted by: LizLem at April 01, 2026 04:10 PM (D1Y0k)

113 68 I have no problem with seizing babies from expelled foreigners, and raising them as Americans. It's perhaps the only way we can profit from these foreign barbarians - as long as we're extremely discriminating about who can adopt.
Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at April 01, 2026 03:57 PM (BI5O2)

Start with these two.

1. No Muslims
2. Nobody related to anyone affiliated with the CCP.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:10 PM (iXqHn)

114 Vox: Even this Supreme Court seems unwilling to end birthright citizenship. At least seven justices appear to believe that the Fourteenth Amendment means what it says.

I'm shocked. I expected the Roberts court to twist itself into a pretzel over this one.

Don't be shocked until we get the ruling. We will likely get exactly what we expect from this group.

There were moments where it felt like ACB, Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh were trying desperately to grasp for any thread of a legitimate argument for the EO. The fixation on “domicile” and exactly what that means and whether it’s relevant to the QP was exhausting.

As long as the Roberts court can touch the bases of “Unitary executive theory”, “national security”, and “history”- there’s nothing they can’t justify.

Will they overturn a 150-year precedent to completely destroy the lives of newborn babies? Yes, probably. They will find a way to do it. Anything great and positive and magnanimous about America - they will find a way to kill it, without going through the necessary amendment-process. They will *think* and *interpret* it out of existence. I expect nothing but the worst from them.

Posted by: Intercepted Reddit Transmissions brought by the Intrepid AoS Liaison at April 01, 2026 04:10 PM (JCZqz)

115 The Democratic party does not see itself as subject to American jurisdiction, so can't we just deport them?

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:10 PM (Fi81e)

116
Barrett said the 14th Amendment's framers declared a "new type of American citizenship. ... They don't focus on the parents. They focus on the child."

-------

The amendment reaffirmed and clarified the nature of citizenship, it didn't create a new category. And it's all about the parents. Their status determines the status of the child. There isn't any other means to do that.

She's just making things up. It's not even plausible on the surface. Partisan signifying, she's joining i with the leftist hacks.

Posted by: Semi-Literate Thug at April 01, 2026 04:12 PM (azNOR)

117 Adoption is another reason why it should be the who and not the where in all of this. The parents are citizens so the child can become a citizen.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:12 PM (n5tGW)

118 The SCROTUMs will shit the bed as usual.

"Supreme" Court my ass.

Posted by: Illegal, immoral and invalid at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (/1l9x)

119 publius,

The coverage presentation is hideous. They might as well be talking about a NASCA race.

As far as weather, the Range WO will be keeping his eye on the field mill system that measures the electrostatic potential in the free air at specific sites scattered around the range.

Posted by: pawn at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (qmOsv)

120 "It's a new world, but the same Constitution". Yes, our point exactly, dummy. The Constitution - not what previously rulings have said, not what laws Congress has passed, not what "everyone knows", not what the lobbyist pays you to say, but the Constitution as written, is the supreme law of the land. And you don't get to ignore "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" just because it's inconvenient. Trump is right, you know he's right, you're just dumbasses. We don't have to enforce "no quartering of soldiers" these days, that doesn't mean it disappears. Just so, although you've never directly ruled on 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in this specific context, doesn't mean it's not a relevant phrase. Koremetsu is actually the opposite extreme, as I recall, vs what everyone on the left tries to claim.

Posted by: RandomDave - new laptop, new hash at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (aJQbY)

121 Sometimes, it just feels like Redditard posts are stealth spiking the football.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (iXqHn)

122 This case deals with foreign kids and she has adopted foreign kids, so not sure which way she'll land.

------------

I doubt she will be helpful. But this case doesn't affect her kids or similar kids. There is no serious contesting of whether foreign kids adopted should be citizens or not. Not now. I would think it would move her closer to our side. But probably not.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (sX1BW)

123 Right to arm bears

Posted by: Miguel cervantes at April 01, 2026 04:14 PM (bXbFr)

124 >>> There is something wrong that Jumanji Jemimah Jackson gets more than enough money to live on for the rest of her life, but my job is falling below the cost of living.

It's a great big scam and you're not in it.

Apparently kash Patel revealed they've caught Warnock on fraud. His salary quadrupled 4x its previous level after he got elected and he moved from a one bedroom to a luxe mansion apartment.

Don't tell us this, Patel, until you actually arrest these parasites.

Posted by: LizLem at April 01, 2026 04:14 PM (D1Y0k)

125 118 Need Luigi for supreme Court culling, only these black robed fascists think that if a billion pregnant foreign women show up tomorrow and drop a baby on the airport tarmac then a billion citizens are created in a day, ridiculous
Posted by: Matthew at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (OdsgZ)

More importantly : A Billion Future Democrat Voters.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:14 PM (iXqHn)

126 I want the Supreme Court to answer for the surrogate issue. Rich Chinese pay surrogates here to have babies, they bring them back, and then they get to vote from China at 18. 1 man has over 100 babies this way. I am sure all those babies are being raised in wonderful conditions, too. Living a beautiful life. This is the biggest point against birthright citizenship. 1 person, 100s of babies…..

Posted by: Piper at April 01, 2026 04:15 PM (Wmg4n)

127 Bad law doesn't magically age into to good law.

Also, I thought everyone knew it's stupid to try and read the tea leaves of what justices ask in oral argument.
Especially since, often, they play devil's advocate to try and reason through the opposing argument.
Posted by: People's Hippo Voice
========
I'll wait and see myself. I have made my arguments and no need to reiterate them. And both of those justices claiming the baby is the thing are undercut by Justice Gray's Wong Ark Kim decision. Deals with domicile and residence to distinguish Wong Ark Kim from the Elkins decision regarding Native Americans on reservations aka non taxed.

Posted by: whig at April 01, 2026 04:15 PM (E4rtv)

128 Crazy story out of Nepal:
Trekking company owners, helicopter operators, hospital executives, and mountain guides have all been caught in a dangerous scam. ...

Everybody profits at the expense of the tourist.

http://tiny.cc/xp71101
Posted by: bonhomme

---------------

Bonnie, are these Nepalese business owners, ... or *Chinese*?
It makes a big difference.

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (Fg7bI)

129 123 This case deals with foreign kids and she has adopted foreign kids, so not sure which way she'll land.

------------

I doubt she will be helpful. But this case doesn't affect her kids or similar kids. There is no serious contesting of whether foreign kids adopted should be citizens or not. Not now. I would think it would move her closer to our side. But probably not.
Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:13 PM (sX1BW)

Or it will, with her solely considering parental jurisdiction and upholding parental rights. You, the parent, always determine the fate of your child, unless you relinquish parental rights.

Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (tOcjL)

130 Trump has done far more on this issue than anyone else. Methinks he is hoping the Court will push back on him, as he needs a foe.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (sX1BW)

131 Don't tell us this, Patel, until you actually arrest these parasites.
Posted by: LizLem

It'll happen any day now. I'm holding my breath!

Posted by: No One with two or more Brain Cells at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (JCZqz)

132 Cleanup 118

Posted by: San Franpsycho at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (RIvkX)

133 Our courts are safeguarding us into inaction as a country, against foreign elements, revolutionaries, criminal enterprises, and against progress itself.

Judges want the world to stop, if it moves away from control. We've seen that happen before the collapse of complex societies, like Rome, Maya, SE Asia. Joe Tainter weeps.

What to do? What to do?

Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:17 PM (u82oZ)

134 It is comical when you think about it.

With a Republican congress and a Republican majority on the SC this "conservative" majority is about to declare it is fine with foreign invader's kids being made citizens AND that allowing massive voter fraud is fine

Posted by: 18-1 at April 01, 2026 04:17 PM (sKqQm)

135 127 I want the Supreme Court to answer for the surrogate issue. Rich Chinese pay surrogates here to have babies, they bring them back, and then they get to vote from China at 18. 1 man has over 100 babies this way. I am sure all those babies are being raised in wonderful conditions, too. Living a beautiful life. This is the biggest point against birthright citizenship. 1 person, 100s of babies…..
Posted by: Piper at April 01, 2026 04:15 PM (Wmg4n)

If the US surrogate gave up parental rights to the Chinese dad, then they are effectively Chinese citizens, not American ones. China doesn't believe in dual citizenship, so I'm surprised they can come back.

Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:18 PM (tOcjL)

136 Vox: Even this Supreme Court seems unwilling to end birthright citizenship. At least seven justices appear to believe that the Fourteenth Amendment means what it says.

---
That's funny from a group of people who criticize the idea of originalism constantly. There, they argue: "Who can tell what a 200-year-old text really means?"

But it doesn't say "except diplomats and envoys". In that case, you could argue "it means what it says", but to find out what it says, you have to under stand the 19th century reading of "subject to the jurisdiction".

Newborns, born in America are born on American soil. But in what sense are they "subject to the jurisdiction"? They'll get arrested for DUIs? Not sure what crime even infants can commit, unless it's misgendering their brother who feels really more like a sister.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:18 PM (Fi81e)

137 101 Stupid line from Roberts, this is the guy that agreed we should change the definition of marriage that we had for thousands of years.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk
======
Roberts dissented in that case.

Posted by: whig at April 01, 2026 04:19 PM (E4rtv)

138 It could be, likely so with these cowards, that they issue a decision that leaves the question entirely open to a million interpretations.

A simple from this day forward ruling would never even cross their minds.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:19 PM (n5tGW)

139 Whig - do you think the Court could give enough dicta on "subject to the jurisdiction of" that could give the admin room to change the relationship of what a foreign visitor is.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:19 PM (sX1BW)

140 Not a huge surprise. They don't rule til June, is this correct or am I hallucinating?

I will pray for minds to open, those that have one and not Kemondo Shell Necklace. For a grand surprise of justice and the right thing. It can't hurt to pray, Morons and 'ettes. It never hurts to pray for specifics. And heaven knows (seriously) all the specifics I pray for every night. The state of MN should feel these prayers against them due to their trans stuff and Somolians.

Dual citizenship...did that little racket come up? How the newly sprouted USA spawn then return to the homeland to train for gangs or commies and return here at 18yrs? To kill, murder and vote Dim? Was that mentioned?

Taking advantage of America's good heart and taxpayer dimes for the birthing. Enriching our culture from this insanity. Using money that should go to Americans, no matter how long they stay.

Legalese bull droppings. Small violins of empathy play as the ladies of the robes swish about piously with their vast intelligence.

I do hope there were some good points made against this, but I don't have the farhtitude to listen.

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at April 01, 2026 04:20 PM (WONhk)

141 136 If the US surrogate gave up parental rights to the Chinese dad, then they are effectively Chinese citizens, not American ones. China doesn't believe in dual citizenship, so I'm surprised they can come back.
Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:18 PM (tOcjL)

Because the CCP is more than happy to have people who will vote in US Elections in the interest of the CCP without ever having to leave China again.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:20 PM (iXqHn)

142 "Why accept this revisionist history?"

[The Dred Scott decision has entered the chat.]

Posted by: Delurker at April 01, 2026 04:20 PM (gtcuf)

143 oh wow whig, I thought for sure he was a yes on gay marriage. I take back what I said.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:20 PM (n5tGW)

144 Yeah, that was Kennedy's "the right not to be lonely" bs

Posted by: RandomDave - new laptop, new hash at April 01, 2026 04:21 PM (aJQbY)

145 I love that the Orientals are having babies here! Maybe I can add to my collection of trophy stunt children...let's see...I need a Tibetan, a Mongolian and a Laotian or a Hmong pygmy child.

Decisions, decisions...

Posted by: Amy Conehead Barrett, collector of trophy stunt children at April 01, 2026 04:21 PM (/1l9x)

146 New York: 7-month-old baby girl in stroller shot and killed in Brooklyn.

Posted by: Joemarine at April 01, 2026 04:21 PM (y171U)

147 The Supreme Court will rule that anchor babies are eligible for WIC, Snap, medicaid, free day care and school lunches before the placenta splashes across the tarmac.

Posted by: Kam Fong as Chin Ho at April 01, 2026 04:21 PM (GPa4z)

148 KBK never read the Constitution

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 04:22 PM (Ia/+0)

149 New York: 7-month-old baby girl in stroller shot and killed in Brooklyn.
Posted by: Joemarine at April 01, 2026 04:21 PM (y171U)

Terrible.

Mamdani's America.

Posted by: John Roberts at April 01, 2026 04:22 PM (Zz0t1)

150 I should just go back to bed.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 04:22 PM (Zz0t1)

151 And both of those justices claiming the baby is the thing are undercut by Justice Gray's Wong Ark Kim decision.

Be he was old. And white. And a man. So, it's not precedent for modern American jurisprudence unless a BIPOC judge agrees. And Thomas don't count, 'cause he ain't black!

Posted by: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson at April 01, 2026 04:22 PM (JCZqz)

152 If you read the congressional record about the discussion before this vote a few things are clear.

- They did not intend it to apply to tourists or those who are loyal to another country, or even "gypsies" or anyone not in good standing
- The text approved by committee was sloppy and they did not quite agree on what it meant, but agreed on what it should mean
- The committee that wrote the amendment was worthless.
- The Senators that debated it were worthless, lazy, and stupid. They knew it was shit, but they moved it on for US to deal with in future.

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at April 01, 2026 04:23 PM (Fg7bI)

153 If the US surrogate gave up parental rights to the Chinese dad, then they are effectively Chinese citizens, not American ones. China doesn't believe in dual citizenship, so I'm surprised they can come back.
Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:18

But they aren’t, they were born here. And if China can control our elections, they are thrilled with a person who is a US citizen on paper, but Chinese in reality.

Posted by: Piper at April 01, 2026 04:23 PM (Wmg4n)

154 Skip

Actively ignorant is no way to go through life.

I would look into the funding of her backers for National Security vetting / prosecution. Gramsci without a license.

Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (u82oZ)

155 It's an exclusive club.

And we ain't in it.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (Zz0t1)

156 "106 Any non-citizen female wishing to enter the country must submit to a pregnancy test"

Nah, that'll get knocked as sexist. hmm, wait I know! Now that men give birth have every non-citizen checked for pregnancy!

Posted by: CTHillary, dead but dreaming at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (Vpqw1)

157 Christy I don't know if those are in the legal briefs. The part I heard this morning didn't seem to address it and there was a lot of talk of the Wang or Wong case.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (n5tGW)

158 Oh, God, they are playing the Challenger tapes. Totally tasteless. This just not done, especially during a launch countdown. NASA has totally lost it.

Posted by: pawn at April 01, 2026 04:25 PM (qmOsv)

159 106 Any non-citizen female wishing to enter the country must submit to a pregnancy test"

Nah, that'll get knocked as sexist. hmm, wait I know! Now that men give birth have every non-citizen checked for pregnancy!

---------------

We should give this test to everyone anyway. Too easy to appear male. Best way to avoid that is everyone must succumb to a drug test before entering our border. Frankly, we should be doing that anyway.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:25 PM (sX1BW)

160 I don't want the country punished with... your babeh!

Posted by: Barky One at April 01, 2026 04:25 PM (DqQS/)

161 It's an exclusive club.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (Zz0t1)
---
And they should be bludgeoned with it, repeatedly.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:26 PM (Fi81e)

162 157 Christy I don't know if those are in the legal briefs. The part I heard this morning didn't seem to address it and there was a lot of talk of the Wang or Wong case.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk

I talked to the judge about my Wang in traffic court, and got thrown in jail for 48 hours for contempt! Two tiered justice system!!!!

Posted by: Admiral Ackbar at April 01, 2026 04:26 PM (JCZqz)

163 Christy I don't know if those are in the legal briefs. The part I heard this morning didn't seem to address it and there was a lot of talk of the Wang or Wong case.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:24 PM (n5tGW)
---
No briefs are illegal!

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:26 PM (Fi81e)

164 159 106 Any non-citizen female wishing to enter the country must submit to a pregnancy test"

Nah, that'll get knocked as sexist. hmm, wait I know! Now that men give birth have every non-citizen checked for pregnancy!

---------------

We should give this test to everyone anyway. Too easy to appear male. Best way to avoid that is everyone must succumb to a drug test before entering our border. Frankly, we should be doing that anyway.
Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:25 PM (sX1BW)

I think you mean blood test, so we can check for pregnancy and a host of diseases/viruses (and yes, drug use, too)...

Posted by: Nova Local at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (tOcjL)

165 “ If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge—whether bloodshed, lawsuits or assaults—take them to the place the Lord your God will choose.”

Deutoronomy 17:8

Posted by: Marcus T at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (DGgho)

166
Just passed T - 2 hours.

Oh wait, they've made things more complicated. There's an "L" clock and a "T" clock. It passed the L - 2 hour mark.

The T clock starts and stops at various time during the L countdown.

Posted by: publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb) at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (w6EFb)

167 161 And they should be bludgeoned with it, repeatedly.
Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:26 PM (Fi81e)

In honor of the celebrated Japanese cultural exchanges, we shall use a Kana-Bo.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (iXqHn)

168 At this point I feel that we are hanging on to the constitutional ledge with broken fingernails.

Posted by: washrivergal at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (P5EsP)

169 OK, Left and Red China. Keep not having babies.

Conservative, home-schooling parents -- Practice makes pregnant.

Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (u82oZ)

170 What did I tell you about lawyers? Fucking nailed it!

Posted by: Bill Shakespeare at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (2UnvF)

171 No briefs are illegal.... on stolen land!

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:28 PM (n5tGW)

172 169 Conservative, home-schooling parents -- Practice makes pregnant.
Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:27 PM (u82oZ)

And teachers make troons.

Posted by: XTC at April 01, 2026 04:28 PM (iXqHn)

173 So we are going to do something that Jim Lovell did 50 years ago?

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:29 PM (sX1BW)

174 I'm sick of the Supreme Court. I don't want them in our lives like this. They're not practically, emotional or even intellectually cut out for roles this significant. We've ceded them and the Courts in general way too much power. It's a systemic breakdown in responsibility and in comprehension of and respect for our history.

Posted by: Ordinary American at April 01, 2026 04:29 PM (fZiTB)

175
Anchor Babies aweigh, my boys!

Posted by: Frank Barone at April 01, 2026 04:29 PM (IifOV)

176 All of the Puperime Justises says they be has end hearing after 30 minutes b because Trumps Breath smelled likes a old garbage can !!!

Posted by: Mary Cloggistein from Brattleboro, Vt at April 01, 2026 04:29 PM (dNEfJ)

177 I listened to the first 40 minutes of the questioning of the Solicitor General. I agree that there won't be five that will agree with Trump's assertion that birthright citizenship is not applicable to children of non-citizens born in the US.

However, I got an impression a majority might agree that Congress can pass a bill defining exactly what 'subject to the jurisdiction of' means in this context. For example, meaning what Trump's team argued for today. A vote on any such bill will never happen, of course. There's nothing in it for any current or future non-Left Congresscritter. Oh well, Trump and the Solicitor General and staff did give it a try.

Posted by: Gref at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (5rh/l)

178 At this point I feel that we are hanging on to the constitutional ledge with broken fingernails.

--

One more Democrat president should finish us off. I can't help but think that.

Posted by: Lady in Black at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (qBdHI)

179 So we are going to do something that Jim Lovell did 50 years ago?

Math?

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (n5tGW)

180 Guy Mohawk

The land in Kansas was stolen by crabs, mollusks, octopi, and shallow water fish, all living in the Inland Sea lo these many years ago.

Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (u82oZ)

181 Bonnie, are these Nepalese business owners, ... or *Chinese*?
It makes a big difference.
Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at April 01, 2026 04:16 PM (Fg7bI)
_________________________

Valid question. China and India both compete for dominance in Nepal. Both sides run scams within to curry favor with the residents. I'd lean towards an India connection.

Posted by: Orson at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (dIske)

182 So what does the SC decision look like?

Anyone born here, even from illegal aliens, automatic full citizenship?

Barrett has how many of the illegal bastards as her pretend kids?

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (eIzlH)

183 No briefs are illegal.... on stolen land!
Posted by: Guy Mohawk

What about tightie whities?

Posted by: rickb223 at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (sUjod)

184 I'm turning it off until final count. Talk about a jinx.

Discusting.

Posted by: pawn at April 01, 2026 04:31 PM (qmOsv)

185 Only an idiot, or, apparently, a Supreme Court Justice, could interpret the 14th amendment to be anything other than ensuring that newly-freed slaves would be considered full citizens. The idea that an illegal alien could have a baby on US soil, and that baby be considered a US citizen, is absurd on its face.

Posted by: Angzarr the Cromulent at April 01, 2026 04:32 PM (XMwZJ)

186 stolen From crabs... Sigh.

Posted by: NaCly Dog at April 01, 2026 04:32 PM (u82oZ)

187 Biden appointed Hawaiian Judge orders Trump to surrender to Iran the way Ole "Blood and Guts" Joe Biden did in Afghanistan.

Quated as saying that "It's for the Children"....

Posted by: CNN Breaking News at April 01, 2026 04:33 PM (YnF8s)

188 No briefs are illegal.... on stolen land!
Posted by: Guy Mohawk

Not stolen... on loin.

Posted by: Barky One at April 01, 2026 04:33 PM (DqQS/)

189 Only an idiot, or, apparently, a Supreme Court Justice, could interpret the 14th amendment to be anything other than ensuring that newly-freed slaves would be considered full citizens.

-----------------

It also meant that in 150 years gays can marry.

Posted by: SH (no more socks) at April 01, 2026 04:33 PM (sX1BW)

190 Nood - Movie review of "Hail Mary".

Posted by: Thrawn at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (9Ovst)

191 If the left has it's way tighty whiteys will be banished from the earth. Get your equity card fast.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (n5tGW)

192 Can we tax the parents of any kids born here illegally?

I mean its of course stupid, but we have John Roberts to thank for such gymnastics.

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (eIzlH)

193 "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"
---
There's an and in there. It doesn't take a genius to know what that means logically. It means that both conditions must hold.

Now, what laws are there that babies must or do follow?

If we take the deflationist approach and say that any sense of being subject to laws applies, how clearly does that apply to kids under 5?

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (Fi81e)

194
Uh-oh, they've got a range safety "issue" they're "working". As of now, range is no-go for launch.

The problem is with the FTS system (flight termination, the self-destruct system if the rocket goes out of control).

From what I just understood they've sent somebody to the VAB to fetch a piece of "legacy hardware" from the Shuttle days they hope to be able to use to fix something.

Posted by: publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb) at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (w6EFb)

195 Subject to the jurisdiction thereof comes from older British common law--jus soli was distinguished from sojourners aka travelers, diplomats, etc. Subject in that meaning had a literal allegiance to her or his majesty. And that meant they were legally bound to do what the sovereign wanted or face charges of treason, sedition, etc.

See Calvin's case as to what that means--Calvin's Case 7 Coke Report 1a, 77 ER 377 where the argument turns on whether Calvin who was a subject of King James of Scotland during Elizabeth's reign suddenly became a English citizen after James ascended the throne.

Posted by: whig at April 01, 2026 04:34 PM (E4rtv)

196
Sorry, they're not saying "legacy hardware", it's "heritage hardware". Heritage hardware... Okay.

So, the FTS isn't working, and they've sent some guy to rummage around the cavernous VAB looking for some piece of old equipment they're supposed to still have lying around.

Posted by: publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb) at April 01, 2026 04:36 PM (w6EFb)

197 Even if you want a plain text reading of the Constitution, there's just common sense.

Like when the 2A enshrined gun rights for Americans, it obviously doesnt apply for someone incarcerated in a prison.

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:36 PM (eIzlH)

198 When the revolution finally comes, I don't want a hair on Jumanji's head harmed. But I do expect her to be picked up by her belt-loops and tossed forcefully into the streets, with the admonition that she will be locked away for life if she ever again asserts that she is so much as an attorney, much less a Supreme Court Justice.

Posted by: Crusader at April 01, 2026 04:36 PM (TN0g+)

199 The 14th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on July 9, 1868, and granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” which specifically included former slaves recently freed.

The Black population should be offended that these illegal Scum Bags get the same rights as they do and not pay any taxes or contribute to the US Society as a Whole and are just "Leeches on their Tax Dollars"...

Posted by: CNN Breaking News at April 01, 2026 04:37 PM (YnF8s)

200 165 “ If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge—whether bloodshed, lawsuits or assaults—take them to the place the Lord your God will choose.”

Deutoronomy 17:8
Posted by: Marcus T

Israel required three generations before a person was 'naturalized' to their kingdom. Basically to ensure loyalty in a dangerous neighborhood and ejection if the family could not adhere to Israeli customs and law during that time.

Posted by: whig at April 01, 2026 04:37 PM (E4rtv)

201 So what is the expected vote for this? 7-2? 9-0?

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:37 PM (eIzlH)

202 >>The problem is with the FTS system

They didn't have that problem on my flight.

Posted by: zombie Christa McAuliffe at April 01, 2026 04:38 PM (Y1sOo)

203 I have 0 faith anything said in the Supreme Court has any bearing on how they rule on it.

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 04:38 PM (Ia/+0)

204 So what is the expected vote for this? 7-2? 9-0?

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:37 PM (eIzlH)

5-4, if we're lucky, 7-2, if we're not.

Posted by: Comrade Flounder, Disinformation Demon at April 01, 2026 04:39 PM (dK+Kv)

205 Barrett has how many of the illegal bastards as her pretend kids?
Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:30 PM (eIzlH)

This is very, very ugly. Adopting children is a great option and it should be something we strongly support in our quest to end abortion. An adopted child has the exact same standing as a biological child. The birth certificate for an adopted child looks no different than a birth certificate for biological children. ACB may be a wild card, but her children are her children, there is nothing illegal about them.

Posted by: Piper at April 01, 2026 04:40 PM (Wmg4n)

206 >>Vox: Even this Supreme Court seems unwilling to end birthright citizenship. At least seven justices appear to believe that the Fourteenth Amendment means what it says.

The 14th is a Hot Mess.

Posted by: garrett at April 01, 2026 04:40 PM (0CqYd)

207 A ha, ha, ha, ha!

Media jinxed the launch.

Probably a battery went out of spec.

I don't know about the new config but the odds of doing a repair on the pad are dicey / Probably have to recycle the propellant load.

Here we go!!!!!!

Posted by: pawn at April 01, 2026 04:41 PM (qmOsv)

208 When the revolution finally comes, I don't want a hair on Jumanji's head harmed. But I do expect her to be picked up by her belt-loops and tossed forcefully into the streets, with the admonition that she will be locked away for life if she ever again asserts that she is so much as an attorney, much less a Supreme Court Justice.

Posted by: Crusader at April 01, 2026 04:36 PM (TN0g+)

I don't expect a riotous mob to be so discerning. But sow and reap.

Posted by: Comrade Flounder, Disinformation Demon at April 01, 2026 04:42 PM (dK+Kv)

209 This is very, very ugly. Adopting children is a great option and it should be something we strongly support in our quest to end abortion. An adopted child has the exact same standing as a biological child. The birth certificate for an adopted child looks no different than a birth certificate for biological children. ACB may be a wild card, but her children are her children, there is nothing illegal about them.
Posted by: Piper

==

Oh please, it clearly means shes going to be super biased to this position.

I'm sure you think all of these Hollywood celebrities that pick up all of these random kids this are just the salt of the Earth and we can criticize it.

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:43 PM (eIzlH)

210 Like when the 2A enshrined gun rights for Americans, it obviously doesnt apply for someone incarcerated in a prison.
Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:36 PM (eIzlH)
---
The extent to which an individual citizen held their rights could always be amended by "substantive due process" (trial). Such an individual review of rights was not seen as "infringement" or "abridgement"

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:44 PM (Fi81e)

211 The 14th is a Hot Mess.
Posted by: garrett at April 01, 2026 04:40 PM (0CqYd)
---
The 14th is a good example of how exuberance should not be the propulsion behind Constitutional amendments.

Hudson confused the enumerated powers which limited the ways that the federal government could interfere with you, with its complement of when the federal government starts insisting to the state that you have this newly found right, on the basis that our rights are not numerable.

It was a overture to a shitshow.

Posted by: Axeman at April 01, 2026 04:48 PM (Fi81e)

212 >>The 14th is a good example of how exuberance should not be the propulsion behind Constitutional amendments.

Well said.

Posted by: garrett at April 01, 2026 04:50 PM (0CqYd)

213 The extent to which an individual citizen held their rights could always be amended by "substantive due process" (trial). Such an individual review of rights was not seen as "infringement" or "abridgement"
Posted by: Axeman

==

Now do airports, why can't I bear arms on a plane?

Posted by: Leupold at April 01, 2026 04:52 PM (eIzlH)

214 "Barrett said the 14th Amendment's framers declared a "new type of American citizenship. ... They don't focus on the parents. They focus on the child."

No the fuck they did not, and this would be a pretty solid causus belli.

There is no amendment enshrining foreign invasion. That's both retarded and suicidal

Posted by: heya at April 01, 2026 04:57 PM (RW4Zm)

215 Trump can only blame himself for this effing MESS!

Posted by: kurtz at April 01, 2026 05:06 PM (rm5Dq)

216 Once the Supreme Court says we are going to get swamled wi t h new citizens we will be screwed

Posted by: Skip at April 01, 2026 05:06 PM (Ia/+0)

217 Order of the Qweef strikes again!

Posted by: Law Review Ninnies Always Wreck America at April 01, 2026 05:23 PM (izK05)

Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0403 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0111 seconds, 225 records returned.
Page size 127 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.

Supreme Court Appears "Skeptical" of Trump's Completely-Correct Arguments on Birthright CitizenshipPlus: Trump to Sign EO Cracking Down on Illegal Mail-In Voting

Comments

Supreme Court Appears "Skeptical" of Trump's Completely-Correct Arguments on Birthright Citizenship
Plus: Trump to Sign EO Cracking Down on Illegal Mail-In Voting