Of Course: The Five Liberal Supreme Court Justices (Including Liberals Roberts and Coney-Barrett) Decide the 14th Amendment Can Go Blow, Anyone Born in the US is a US Citizen

The Five Horsemen make a mockery of the law yet again.

That's the full awful left-wing holding.

The liberals make two extraordinary claims. First, they claim that the 14th Amendment is based on the ancient British rule of the king being sovereign over anyone born in his lands. But even there they're forced to admit that that rule did not confer full jurisdiction over the person -- and it's silly to claim the one is based on the other anyway, as Thomas points out in his dissent.

The other absurd horse they ride is that the Dred Scott decision was bad bad terra-bad and therefore, they seem to believe, they are required to create a fake rule that is 1000% the opposite of that.

But that was taken care of -- the 14th Amendment was adopted precisely to repudicate Dred Scott and declare that former slaves born in the US, who also are not subject to any other jurisdiction but the US -- former slaves have no homeland or nation they owe primary allegiance to -- are US citizens.

So why even discuss Dred Scott? It was specifically repudiated and has nothing to say about the Amendment adopted specifically to repudiate it.

But they spend a huge chunk of their opinion discussing it because their own arguments are weak so they have to set up a straw-man -- if we don't adopt this fake rule and ignore the "subject to the jurisdiction" qualifier of the 14th Amendment, we're essentially re-implementing Dred Scott and that's just terrible, right?

JUSTICE THOMAS, with whom JUSTICE GORSUCH joins,
dissenting.

This Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How.
393 (1857), would have permanently denied citizenship to
blacks as "a subordinate and inferior class." Id., at 404--
405. After the Civil War, the Reconstruction Congress over-
ruled Dred Scott, first with the Civil Rights Act of 1866,
then with the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment. Both the Civil Rights Act and the Citizenship Clause
guaranteed citizenship to persons born and domiciled in the
United States regardless of their race. Neither guaranteed
citizenship to persons who were not domiciled in the United
States.

Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were
Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no alle-
giance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other
authority. They "fought and bled in the same battles,"
"gained and gloried in the same victories," and were "liable
to be called upon to defend [America] in time of war" along-
side every other citizen. 2 Life and Writings of Frederick
Douglass 256, 266 (P. Foner ed. 1950) (Douglass). The Cit-
izenship Clause thus guaranteed them the "dignity and
glory of American citizenship," so as to ensure that they
would never be treated as second class under the law.
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 537, 555 (1896) (Harlan, J.,
dissenting).

The same could not be said for the children of foreign tem-
porary visitors. Foreign temporary visitors were attached
to their home country, lacked similar bonds to this country,
and would not be called upon in time of war. Americans,
consistent with their settler ethos, believed that citizens
were the people who called a place home. Accordingly, dom-
icile--a person's legal home--played a key role in both state
and national citizenship in America. A person was a "citi-
zen" of the state where he had his "domicil." Barber v. Bar-
ber, 21 How. 582, 599 (1859). When foreigners temporarily
visited, their "national character" was unchanged. The Ve-
nus, 8 Cranch 253, 278--279 (1814). Such visitors were
"strangers," not "subjects." Id., at 278. A person born here
but domiciled in a foreign land was therefore considered "as
much a stranger to the country as his father." 1 H. St.
George Tucker, Commentaries on the Laws of Virginia 57
(1836) (Tucker).

That is why, when Dred Scott went to court, he argued
that to be a "citizen," "it is only necessary that he should
have acquired a domicil." Brief for Plaintiff in Dred Scott v.
Sandford, D. T. 1855, No. 7, p. 6. (Brief for Dred Scott). Af-
ter this Court held that Scott was not a citizen because he
was black, Republicans in Congress, such as Representa-
tive John Bingham, stated that a person was a citizen if he
was "born and domiciled" in the United States. Cong.
Globe, 35th Cong., 2d Sess., 983 (1859). Scott was a citizen,
in their view, because he was born to Americans, not to
"temporary sojourners." Cong. Globe, 35th Cong., 1st Sess.,
210 (185 (statement of Rep. Bliss). As Frederick Douglass
had put it, the freedmen sought citizenship "not as aliens
nor as exiles," but as "Americans." 2 Douglass 255 (empha-
sis added).

Congress implemented the principle that citizenship fol-
lows birth and domicile in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and
then in the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment. The Civil Rights Act guaranteed citizenship to per-
sons who were both "born in the United States" and, as rel-
evant here, "not subject to any foreign power." Act of Apr.
9, 1866, 14 Stat. 27. The phrase "not subject to any foreign
power" excluded from citizenship children of foreign tempo-
rary visitors, who were subject to the power of their home
nation. See, e.g., The Pizarro, 2 Wheat. 227, 246 (1817); The
Venus, 8 Cranch, at 278--279. The Citizenship Clause,
which the same Congress passed shortly after the Civil
Rights Act, was understood to have the same meaning. It
guaranteed citizenship to persons who were both "born . . .
in the United States" and "subject to the jurisdiction
thereof." Amdt. 14, §1.

A person was subject to the jurisdiction of the govern-
ment of his domicile. "Domicil" was "the foundation of ju-
risdiction over persons." 1 T. Twiss, The Law of Nations
239 (1861) (Twiss). The government of a person's domicile
had broad power over that person, including with respect to
his personal affairs, his conduct abroad, his personal taxes,
and the mutual duties of protection and allegiance. So, as
the Senator who introduced the Citizenship Clause ex-
plained, "the word 'jurisdiction,' as here employed, ought to
be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction
. . . the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to
every citizen of the United States now." Cong. Globe, 39th
Cong., 1st Sess., 2895 (1866) (statement of Sen. Howard).
After all, Congress "would have no right to make citizens"
of "persons temporarily resident." Id., at 572 (statement of
Sen. Trumbull).

The Citizenship Clause was consistently interpreted not
to apply to the children of foreign temporary visitors, who
were by definition not domiciled in the United States. Re-
gardless of administration or party, the Federal Govern-
ment for decades after ratification regularly denied claims
to citizenship by children who were born in the United
States but not domiciled here. When a child was "born" in
the United States to parents "domiciled" abroad, he was
"not, therefore, under the statute and the Constitution a
citizen of the United States by birth." Letter from Sec. of
State T. Bayard to B. Winchester (Nov. 28, 1885), in 2 F.
Wharton, Digest of International Law 399--400 (2d ed.
1887) (Wharton Digest). Scholars agreed: A child "born
within the territory of the United States, of alien parents"
was not a citizen unless his parents were "permanently
domiciled within the United States." W. Robinson, Notes
on Elementary Law 70 (1875). This Court agreed: The Cit-
izenship Clause "exclude[d] from its operation children of
. . . citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the
United States." Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 73
(1873). And, Congress agreed: The Citizenship Clause did
not extend to a child born here but "subject to any foreign
power." See Enforcement Act of 1870, §18, 16 Stat. 144
(reenacting Act of Apr. 9, 1866, 14 Stat. 27). As Justice
Harlan would write in his dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163
U. S. 537, the Citizenship Clause "gave citizenship to all
born or naturalized in the United States and residing here."
Id., at 563 (emphasis added).

The Court offers a different account. American citizen-
ship, the Court says, was based on a medieval English "feu-
dal" principle, according to which each person "owed per-
sonal service to the lord of the soil" as his "master"--a
perpetual servitude that was "born with the child and only
ended in the grave." 2 Cong. Rec. 3282 (1874) (statement of
Rep. Cox). Americans, the Court says, adopted this feudal
principle as a rule of American citizenship "with little fan-
fare." Ante, at 4. Then, according to the Court, the Recon-
struction Congress codified that feudal principle with the
words "not subject to any foreign power" in the Civil Rights
Act and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof " in the Citizen-
ship Clause. Then, the Court says, the Clause's meaning
was definitively settled by dicta in United States v. Wong
Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649 (189.

With due respect, the Court's account is not historically
accurate. The Court says that the Citizenship Clause in-
corporated the English feudal principle that subjects owed
lifetime servitude to the King who owned the soil on which
they were born, but Americans--unsurprisingly--rejected
this feudal principle. The Court's theory of American citi-
zenship is based on the opinion of a New York assistant vice
chancellor in an inheritance dispute called Lynch v. Clarke,
1 Sand. Ch. 583, 584--585 (N. Y. Ch. 1844). Ante, at 6--10.
But, the assistant vice chancellor's reasoning, whatever it
was worth, was not even followed in New York by the time
of the Citizenship Clause. Finally, the Court reasons that
dicta in Wong Kim Ark settled the meaning of the Clause.
But, Wong Kim Ark itself emphasized that its holding was
limited to persons domiciled in the United States. And,
scholars and government officials continued to agree after
Wong Kim Ark that the Citizenship Clause did not extend
to the children of foreign temporary visitors. The rule re-
mained what it always was: A child born on American soil
of "a stranger or traveler passing through the country, or
temporarily residing here," was "not a citizen." H. Black,
Handbook of American Constitutional Law 634 (3d ed.
1910).

The Court today takes the extraordinary step of holding
facially unconstitutional the President's Order excluding
from citizenship the children of foreign temporary visitors
and illegal aliens. In doing so, the Court adds to the sad
history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was designed
and understood to secure equal rights for the freed blacks
but has instead been repurposed for political projects that
the Reconstruction Congress did not support. Because
many potential applications of the President's Order are
consistent with the original public meaning of the Citizen-
ship Clause, I respectfully dissent.

And Alito's dissent:

JUSTICE ALITO, dissenting.

This is one of the most important decisions in the history
of the Court, and in my judgment, the Court has made a
serious mistake. As interpreted by the Court today, the
Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on virtually
everyone who happens to be born in this country, including
the children of "birth tourists," women who come here solely
for the purpose of giving birth to a child and then promptly
return home. Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth
Amendment and the process that led to its adoption shows
that it does not degrade the concept of United States citi-
zenship in this way. Instead, the Fourteenth Amendment
confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe
allegiance solely to this country.

Respecting this interpretation would not require uproot-
ing the millions of children who were born here to mothers
who entered or remained in this country illegally. Those
children are not responsible for their parents' violation of
our immigration laws, and their plight is the result of a long
period during which a coterie of actors--Executive Branch
officials, States and cities, and a variety of private groups--
sent the message to would-be immigrants that our
immigration laws should not be taken too seriously. This
message, coupled with ineffective or unenthusiastic en-
forcement, spurred massive illegal immigration and the
growth of a large contingent of people who were born here
to mothers unlawfully present in this country. Some mem-
bers of this group have lived here for years, and they have
a strong moral claim to be able to remain in the land where
they grew up.

Congress can and should address their situation. The
Fourteenth Amendment dictates who must be a citizen, but
it does not address who may be a citizen by Act of Congress.
Congress has conferred citizenship on many people who are
not made citizens by the Fourteenth Amendment, including
children born abroad to American citizen parents. These
people and the millions of immigrants who have been natu-
ralized are no less American than those who are fortunate
enough to be born here.

For these reasons, the original meaning of the Fourteenth
Amendment does not require inhumane results, and we
should not adopt an erroneous interpretation of the Four-
teenth Amendment simply out of fear of the consequences
of "rocking the boat" or as a reaction to current immigration
policy.

Nor should we take the position that our hands are tied
by dicta in a sprawling 19th-century opinion that is, to put
the point gently, very far from a model of careful judicial
craftsmanship. Too much is at stake.

United States citizenship is precious. Anyone who has
attended a ceremony where citizens are naturalized can see
that message on the faces of those who take the citizenship
oath. Before saddling the Nation with a medieval rule, we
had better be certain the Constitution requires it.
The Court's account of the birthright-citizenship rule in
American law is roughly as follows. After American inde-
pendence, the British rule of birthright subjecthood was
modified in just one way (to take account of Indians who
lived under tribal governance), but otherwise the rule was
transplanted intact to American soil. As modified, the rule
was that a child born in this country is automatically an
American citizen unless the child is born to tribal Indians
or to a diplomat with immunity from legal process. During
the period before the Civil War, the rule's status was firm.
After the war, Congress codified the rule in §1 of the Four-
teenth Amendment. And in United States v. Wong Kim Ark,
169 U. S. 649 (189, this Court issued a binding precedent
confirming what Congress had done.

Alito makes some strong points about the majority of liberals' insane claim that a rule of the British monarchy deciding who was a subject of the king's tyrannical power should dictate the rule of the American democracy about who is granted the rights and priviliges of citizenship.

Subjecthood and citizenship aren't the same, you know.

Every step of this story is incorrect. The Declaration of
Independence repudiated the foundation on which the Brit-
ish rule was based. See infra, at 5. From 1776 until the eve
of the Civil War, the status of the rule in this country was
unsettled. There is no evidence establishing that the Con-
stitution's references to citizens incorporated the British
rule, infra, at 5--8, and until the eve of the Civil War, there
was little litigation about the meaning of American citizen-
ship, infra, at 9--11. After the war, Congress finally adopted
a constitutional provision, §1 of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment, making certain persons citizens at birth, but that
provision differed substantially from the British rule. It
specified that a person born here is not a citizen unless his
allegiance to the United States is unimpaired by any obli-
gations to a foreign power. Infra, at 11--22. And while
Wong Kim Ark included dicta suggesting that the Four-
teenth Amendment incorporates the British rule, its actual
holding was much narrower, infra, at 22--28, and under
that interpretation, respondents' challenge to Executive
Order No. 14160, Protecting the Meaning and Value of
American Citizenship, fails, infra, at 36--39.

I

A

According to the Court, the Fourteenth Amendment's Cit-
izenship Clause codified the British rule of birthright
subjecthood with only one new exception, which was needed
to accommodate the unique status of American Indians.
That is a curious claim, and it is ironic that the Court
should embrace it only days before we celebrate the 250th
anniversary of our Declaration of Independence, which em-
phatically renounced the foundation on which the British
rule rested.

That rule did not concern "citizenship." There was no
such thing as a "citizen" of England, Scotland, or Ireland.
The inhabitants of the British Isles were the King's "sub-
jects." As Sir Edward Coke explained in Calvin's Case, 7
Co. Rep. 1a, 77 Eng. Rep. 377 (K. B. 160, they acquired
that status automatically at birth, and they retained it, like
it or not, until they died. Id., at 4b, 77 Eng. Rep., at 382;
see id., at 9b, 77 Eng. Rep., at 388 (even a subject who ab-
jures the realm "oweth the King his ligeance"). This status
arose from a feudal understanding of the origin of govern-
mental authority and the relationship between those who
govern and those who are governed. The King's authority
was understood to come from God. Id., at 12b--13a, 77 Eng.
Rep., at 390--391. As Coke put it, a King ruled by the law
of nature. Ibid. And birth established the bond between
King and subject, id., at 4b, 77 Eng. Rep., at 382, just as
birth establishes the bond between parent and child.
In Calvin's Case, the question was whether a man born
in Scotland was a subject of King James I of England, who
acceded to the thrones of both Scotland and England before
the man's birth. Id., at 2a, 77 Eng. Rep., at 379. In a fa-
mous speech to Parliament, James I forcefully explained his
views about the source of his authority and his relationship
with his subjects. The King, he proclaimed, sits "upon
GOD[']s throne" and is the "father of his people." March 21,
1609 A Speach to the Lords and Commons of the Parlia-
ment at White-Hall, in The Political Works of James I,
p. 307 (C. McIlwain ed. 191.

Well this sucks.

We need a real conservative justice to at least win most of these 5-4.

Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain:

Senator Eric Schmitt
@SenEricSchmitt
The Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision is wrong, dangerous, and disastrous for American sovereignty and the American people. If we can't fix it with ordinary legislation, then we must do what the Constitution commands in moments of national crisis: We must amend the Constitution and restore American citizenship. We must again put "We the People" first.

The Supreme Court's decision constitutionalizing unlimited birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens and temporarily present aliens is wrong--and disastrous for our sovereignty and the future of our republic.

The decision exposes America to grave national security risks and threatens to erode the integrity of the core of American self-government: citizenship.

Citizenship is more than paperwork issued by the government. It is more than a bureaucratic label that grants access to government programs.

Citizenship is the covenantal bond between a nation and its people.

In a republic like ours, that bond carries enormous weight. In the United States, sovereignty does not belong to a king or a ruling class. It belongs to the American people themselves.

Citizenship defines the legal recognition of who the American people are.

Citizenship defines the political community that governs the United States.

It defines who exercises the sovereign authority of this republic.

But under the Supreme Court's erroneous interpretation, the Constitution now requires citizenship for anyone who happens to be born on U.S. soil.

Even if their parents entered the country illegally. In other words, even if the American people--the citizenry--have prohibited those parents from entering our territory.

Even if they are here only temporarily as tourists or on student visas.

Even if they have no intention of joining the American nation.

That is a dramatic departure from how serious nations understand citizenship. Under the Supreme Court's decision, citizenship no longer reflects allegiance or loyalty to a country and its laws. It becomes an administrative status to be seized by interlopers.

This ruling is the final alarm bell.

The bond of American citizenship has slowly eroded through a series of Supreme Court opinions, congressional actions and inactions, and circumstances the Framers of our Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment could not have foreseen.

The result is a constitutional order in which the American people are losing control over the most basic question in any republic: who belongs to the political community that governs the nation.

This has been the central fight of my work in this important year for American national identity. I led an amicus brief in this very case. I convened a hearing on birthright citizenship and the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. I have pressed this issue because citizenship is the threshold question of the republic. If we lose control of citizenship, we lose control of self-government itself.

In the wake of an erroneous Supreme Court ruling like this one, Congress has a duty to examine the Constitution's text, the historical record, and the policy consequences.

Congress also has the power to respond.

When the Court mistakenly interprets a statute, Congress can amend the statute through bicameralism and presentment.

But when the Court entrenches its mistake as a constitutional command, the remedy must match the injury. Congress can propose an amendment under Article V, and the states can ratify it. That process is purposefully difficult. It requires two-thirds of each chamber of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states.

Here, the Supreme Court issued a constitutional ruling. Ordinary legislation cannot repair the damage. A constitutional amendment is now required.

Accordingly, I will be announcing a forthcoming constitutional amendment to restore the sacred bond between American citizens and their government.

That amendment will restore the original American understanding of citizenship. It will restore the right of the American people to define their own political community. And it will ensure that citizenship once again reflects allegiance, permanence, and membership in the American nation.

This amendment accords with the text, history, and tradition of the Constitution and the American conception of citizenship.

It restores the principle embodied in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the law that formed the basis for the Fourteenth Amendment. As my amicus brief in this case explained, the law contained a citizenship provision establishing that "all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power" would be granted birthright citizenship.

That provision was understood to grant birthright citizenship to children born of parents domiciled in the United States while clearly excluding children born to foreign parents temporarily visiting the United States.

And as my brief recounts, the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted to constitutionalize the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The original American understanding of citizenship was never a suicide pact. It was never a weapon for illegal entry, temporary presence, demographic conquest, or foreign influence.

Left unaddressed, this Supreme Court decision will destroy the republic. A nation that cannot determine who belongs to its political community will lose control of its sovereignty and its unique character and traditions as new generations of unassimilated foreigners are automatically granted citizenship.

We have seen exactly what this process looks like as foreign communists have essentially taken over New York City politics. We cannot allow this Supreme Court decision to consign the rest of our nation to the same fate.

Today is a sad day in the history of our republic. But America and the Constitution have survived for 250 years because each generation has had patriots who, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, valiantly fought back the existential threats this great nation has faced.

Our generation's existential threat is a hostile takeover through mass migration.

We must--and we will--honor the patriots who came before us by doing our part to ensure we pass on America, the Constitution, and our nation--the real versions, not desiccated husks.

That work begins with restoring the right of the American people to decide who joins the political community that governs the United States and exercises the people's sovereignty.

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 St?

Posted by: Clay at June 30, 2026 12:11 PM (5Rf2z)

2 Hola

Posted by: Thanatopsis at June 30, 2026 12:11 PM (Lx4gz)

3
hi

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:12 PM (XJ22o)

4 Pessimism spares me from disappointment once again.

Onto the midterms.

Posted by: Victor Tango Kilo at June 30, 2026 12:12 PM (Aol+p)

5
ace, thanks for digging in. I knew you'd do it.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:13 PM (XJ22o)

6 The block quotes are formatted weird today. Props to ace for the new html tomfoolery!

Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:13 PM (8mulE)

7 Did something just happen?

Posted by: Becasue I thought nothing ever happens at June 30, 2026 12:14 PM (2Ez/1)

8 Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain:

Nothing will happen.

Posted by: That Guy who intones, sonorously, "Nothing will happen." at June 30, 2026 12:14 PM (0sNs1)

9 If the authors of the fourteenth meant that anyone born here is a citizen, then why didn’t they just say that? Guess I’m not smart enough to be a Supreme Court justice.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 30, 2026 12:14 PM (u73oe)

10 The Supreme Court is simply, completely removed from American life and the current prevailing crises of our time. They just live wholly segregated lives in an artificial ecosystem, transfixed on legalisms, precedents and penumbras.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:14 PM (E2lD7)

11 It's interesting that this is even under discussion... can anyone imagine this even being considered under the reign of Teh Won?

Posted by: man at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (XuXeR)

12 I have no idea how they grappled with the fact that hundreds of thousands of American Indians were born in the United States without becoming United States citizens, until the 1920s.

Prior to the 1920s, most tribes were sovereign - if you were Sioux, you were a citizen of the Sioux Nation, not the United States.

There was a naturalization process for Indians to become US citizens, if they wished, but it wasn't a given.

Posted by: The ARC of History! at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (aD4fx)

13 The Birthright decision makes no sense, is not what the intent of the amendment is as expressed by the writers of the amendment and is a wholly made concoction of the courts.


I see no way forward except the implementation of strenuous and rigorous immigration and border enforcement and the immediate expulsion of any foreign woman in the custody of the United States to either their home country or to a location outside of the country to await any proceedings and proceedings will be conducted via CCTV.

Posted by: Thomas Bender at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (XV/Pl)

14 Nothing will happen.
Posted by: That Guy who intones, sonorously, "Nothing will happen." at June 30, 2026 12:14 PM

++++++++

Whew. That's a relief.

Posted by: Becasue I thought nothing ever happens at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (2Ez/1)

15 Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain:

Yup. That'll do it.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (vTZFs)

16 8 Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain:

Constitutional amendment? How many years would that take? Ridiculous.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (E2lD7)

17 Two bad decisions in as many days thanks to the 5 liberals on the court.

This country is fucked.

Posted by: Scuba_Dude at June 30, 2026 12:16 PM (qoLdL)

18 >>>The block quotes are formatted weird today. Props to ace for the new html tomfoolery!

when you cut and paste from a decision, they have all of these line-breaks hard-coded into the text. Sometimes I go in and attempt to remove them all, but it's a real pain in the ass, and I didn't feel like doing it for all of this text.

Posted by: Lamont the Big Dummy at June 30, 2026 12:16 PM (1wjle)

19 So vile that Barrett and Roberts did this the week of the 250th. There won't be a 300th for sure.

Posted by: Josh Brolin's Blistered Taint at June 30, 2026 12:16 PM (Oungn)

20 Being anti-racist is a good position to have, because it means anyone you are against is racist.

Posted by: PG at June 30, 2026 12:16 PM (5tjvu)

21 "This ruling is the final alarm bell."

"Hold our beer." - SCOTUS

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (Jr5Lq)

22 what makes it really hard to remove the line-break code is that it's invisible, and I have to go in and delete all spaces between words I think might have the line break between them.

A real pain in the ass and with all of this text, I just couldn't do it.

Posted by: Lamont the Big Dummy at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (1wjle)

23 I wonder if Barrett and Roberts have any comprehension of what they've done?

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (E2lD7)

24 well, i guess keep the border closed and no tourist visas for women of child bearing age from places like china. a partial solution here is better than none

Posted by: gnats local 678 at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (CWTWj)

25 Wong Kim Ark?
Does that come with an egg roll?

Posted by: Not exactly a legal scholar at June 30, 2026 12:18 PM (2Ez/1)

26 I don't want to hear any empty, howling rhetoric on Truth Social. I'm sick of it. Put together a plan and take action.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:18 PM (E2lD7)

27 Citizenship is the covenantal bond between a nation and its people.
-
It should be.

It isn't because we have tolerated far too many people, especially these courts, who do not share the founding values of this country, nor it's allegiance to God as the source of the Rights we claim, to continue to live among us.

That needs to stop. Deport the illegals. Exile the progressives. Execute any who don't leave voluntarily.

It probably won't have to go that far if they believe we're willing to go that far, but our current insistence on going along to get along just cannot continue.

Posted by: Methos at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (vSvIl)

28 One of my cats repudicated this morning and it took a whole roll of paper towels to mop it up.

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (Jr5Lq)

29 TL/DR

What movie was this reviewing?

Posted by: mindful webworker - Obsession? at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (/4mOE)

30 "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."

how does this apply toa tourist visa newborn who gets taken to another country when like 10 days old and lives elsewhere for 18 or more years? does it?

Posted by: gnats local 678 at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (CWTWj)

31 >>I see no way forward except the implementation of strenuous and rigorous immigration and border enforcement and the immediate expulsion of any foreign woman in the custody of the United States to either their home country or to a location outside of the country to await any proceedings and proceedings will be conducted via CCTV.
__
Amen. Expand Gitmo.

Posted by: Frasier Crane at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (bNf8H)

32 JUSTICE THOMAS, ... dissenting.

This Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393 (1857), would have permanently denied citizenship to blacks as "a subordinate and inferior class." ... Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority.

He writes very beautifully.

Posted by: m at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (6wpGE)

33 all of their writings obscure one CLEAR thing that nations borders are not permanent. the maps used in the writing of the 14th amendment did not have the same frontier we have today.

Posted by: paulnjax at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (PPnyU)

34 Good afternoon Ace.
During the debates about the 14th amendment the Michigan senator argued for a limited interpretation of equal protection as applying only to freed slaves. A Conn senator argued that it should be expansive. The Michigan senator won out in how it was written.
However the courts have decided like the Conn senator won.
Same here

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (f6yx7)

35 29 TL/DR

What movie was this reviewing?
Posted by: mindful webworker - Obsession? at June 30, 2026 12:19 PM (/4mOE)

"How the West Was Lost"

Posted by: m at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (6wpGE)

36 FIRST!!!!!

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (7Q7Ca)

37 When Thomas writes a dissent, he gives a scolding. When Sotomayor or KBJ write a dissent, they are throwing a tantrum.

Posted by: tankdemon at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (2RJDy)

38 America will be majority Chinese in 25 years.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:21 PM (7Q7Ca)

39 The term "birth right" itself is completely twisted. By any reasonable understanding it should refer to the procreation process, that is a woman gives birth and so the child receives the citizenship of the parents.

Posted by: MAGA_Ken at June 30, 2026 12:21 PM (Vh9CX)

40 When Thomas writes a dissent, he gives a scolding. When Sotomayor or KBJ write a dissent, they are throwing a tantrum.
Posted by: tankdemon at June 30, 2026 12:20 PM (2RJDy)


This is the difference between having a brain and receiving a liberal education.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:21 PM (7Q7Ca)

41 Somewhat related: I've seen several comments on X noting that Germany's loss to Paraguay after listless play in the World Cup is going to boost the votes for the AfD.

Why? The "German" team is no longer German, but is rather multinational, and the resulting poor quality of play is symbolic of what has been happening to Germany as a whole.

Posted by: The ARC of History! at June 30, 2026 12:21 PM (aD4fx)

42 I wonder if Barrett and Roberts have any comprehension of what they've done?
Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (E2lD7)
------------

Of course they do--they've prevented antifa from sending goons to threaten them and their families.

Posted by: meerkat at June 30, 2026 12:22 PM (mxEar)

43 How many times have Roberts and Barrett stuck the knife in us? It must be nearing a record.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:22 PM (E2lD7)

44 Constitutional amendment? How many years would that take? Ridiculous.
Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (E2lD7)

The support isn't there, so I don't see it happening anytime soon. However, the 26th amendment was passed after only 100 days. That's the one that lowered the voting age to 18 in the 1970s. From the time it passed Congress until the states ratified it: 100 days.

If the support is there, it can happen quickly.

Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (8mulE)

45 >>> If we can't fix it with ordinary legislation, then we must do what the Constitution commands in moments of national crisis: We must amend the Constitution and restore American citizenship. We must again put "We the People" first.

Trump needs to order all U.S. bound pregnant women turned around and otherwise women provide a negative pregnancy test result as a condition of entry. Furthermore, all women illegals must be immediately rounded up and detained for expedited removal as threat to national security.

I am not joking.

Posted by: Comrade Flounder, Disinformation Demon at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (dK+Kv)

46
This here from the dissent:

"Foreign temporary visitors were attached to their home country, lacked similar bonds to this country, and would not be called upon in time of war."

Uh, all male U.S. citizens are required by law to register with the Selective Service System. This applies even if they're overseas.

The usual (and lamentable) 5-year statute of limitations applies, so I'm sure the Chinese and Muslim anchor boys know enough not to "return" to their "native land" to do their mischief until they're 30 years old.

But we could still start enforcing this wherever possible.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (XJ22o)

47 Fuck John Roberts -
Women shouldn't be on the Bench.

Posted by: garrett at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (/ytnd)

48 There was a flurry briefly by NPR falsely stating that Alito was retiring.

I posit to you: do we really need to replace the next outgoing Justice? The left keeps talking about "packing the Court", how about "shrinking the court". Make all ideological rulings 6-6 and stalemate the Court if it can't property make a ruling. It cannot be any worse than it is now, can it?

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (E4Afo)

49 Of course they do--they've prevented antifa from sending goons to threaten them and their families.
Posted by: meerkat at June 30, 2026 12:22 PM (mxEar)

The cruel truth for them is that they haven't done that at all.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (E2lD7)

50 Posted by: Lamont the Big Dummy at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (1wjle)

Noted. But I still like to snark.

Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:24 PM (8mulE)

51 Despite all the other wins, this one in many ways was the most important. Sure, smashing independent agencies, giving Trump the power to fire subordinates, and stopping Hawaii's "vampire law" for gun owners are all important, but screwing up birthright citizenship in many ways makes things moot, and it can change the nation's demographics and voter base, which changes politics and politicians supported, eventually changing the nation and culture.

Posted by: Intercepted Reddit Transmissions brought by the Intrepid AoS Liaison at June 30, 2026 12:24 PM (uaWfi)

52
If the support is there, it can happen quickly.
Posted by: No Name Today

==============

Another lickety-split amendment was the one to repeal Prohibition. It can be done.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:24 PM (XJ22o)

53 The only good news from this clusterfuck of a decision is that it doesn't change anything.

We've been living in a world of unlimited birthright citizenship for 100 years. No president -- not even conservative heroes like Reagan -- would touch it. Trump took a shot. He missed.

We have lost nothing. We are where we were 24 hours ago. Sure, if we won it would have been Absolutely Fucking Yuge.

It's like playing the Powerball. If you win, your life is changed forever. If you lose, your life isn't changed at all. You've lost nothing.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at June 30, 2026 12:24 PM (iFTx/)

54 Totally unsurprising. Now we need a legislative fix( yeah I know, good luck with that )

Posted by: steevy at June 30, 2026 12:24 PM (YwEeS)

55 But when the Court entrenches its mistake as a constitutional command, the remedy must match the injury. Congress can propose an amendment under Article V, and the states can ratify it. That process is purposefully difficult. It requires two-thirds of each chamber of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states.
-
Which mean is won't happen.

The foreigners control the vote producing and counting procedures of too many states for that to be possible.

Posted by: Methos at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (vSvIl)

56 I see this getting overturned in twenty years.
If the country survives that is.
As it is, this is a dagger poised over the heart of America. The SAVE Act becomes crucial now. Clean up voter roles, keep power in the House and Senate, get better judges.

Posted by: Diogenes at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (2WIwB)

57
*shrugs*

This Court decison was predictable in the same way as the sturm und drang in the Congress about SAVE.

There is always a push and pull in a system like ours. Institutions will throw the occasional treat to the subject classes, particularly if they're looking restive, today.

But they'll sooner kill the Gracchi brothers or lock up Donald Trump than give an inch toward a populist reform that limits their power, today.

Anchor babies and vote fraud are both core & salient features of our ruling class' Current Year Project, and they won't countenance any contradiction from the Court or Congress, and these ruling class Institutions wish to remain ruling class Institutions, so they won't offer it.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (BI5O2)

58 Reminder that there have been only two real "proposition nations" in modern history.

One is the U.S. The other was the Soviet Union.

Posted by: Dr. T at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (jGGMD)

59 Deport the parents, keep the kids.

If you're here on a visa and give birth, your visa automatically expires. The kid stays, you leave.

Call it the Roberts and Barrett Rule

Posted by: Stu Podaso at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (M0V4/)

60 Time for Trump to pack the court. Add enough Justices to offset the two dipshits and a few more for good measure. Thirteen sounds like a proper number.

Posted by: Rotkappchen at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (j3Fsw)

61 I am not joking.
Posted by: Comrade Flounder, Disinformation Demon at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (dK+Kv)

I know you're not, but you might as well be. Because that will never happen.

Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (E2lD7)

62 Hey at least they threw us a bone with no women in men's sports, right?

:facepalm:

Posted by: Taq, Rickrolled by Jesus at June 30, 2026 12:26 PM (IhL8c)

63 57 Well put.

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:26 PM (Jr5Lq)

64 "Time for Trump to pack the court. Add enough Justices to offset the two dipshits and a few more for good measure. Thirteen sounds like a proper number."

Like Trump has been doing a bang-up job in his nominations to the Court recently. Sure, let's add a few more Barretts. How about an illegal lesbian Syrian whilst were at it?

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:26 PM (E4Afo)

65 "The only good news from this clusterfuck of a decision is that it doesn't change anything."

That's kinda my feeling about this. If it had never been heard, what would be different?

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 12:27 PM (DZ9Lv)

66 of course they did.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (VyBeY)

67 Movie review length too

Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (Kt19C)

68 'A real pain in the ass and with all of this text, I just couldn't do it.'

Maybe there's a way to sic an AI on that, if it's just a reformatting task. Meanwhile, thanks for the hard work

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (Jr5Lq)

69 Good afternoon Ace and everyone
The Bastards kept opened up birther tourism

Posted by: Skip at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (sgkY8)

70 This is so make or break everything.

השם ירחם

Posted by: Biden's Dog sniffs a whole lotta malarkey, at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (x8PQF)

71
But we could still start enforcing this wherever possible.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia

==============

What am I talking about? We could repeal the statute.

If ANY anchor boy shows up ANY time in his whole damn life without having registered for the draft, it's off to Leavenworth and he gets stripped of his citizenship for committing a federal crime.

At a minimum, start enforcing this law.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:28 PM (XJ22o)

72 Alito’s dissent is great, thanks for posting it.

John Roberts and his all girl fan club have defined “subject to the jurisdiction of” as including every sentient being inside American boundaries, except for space aliens in UFO’s and Bigfoot. And even they may have a claim.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (orF8y)

73 "Deport the parents, keep the kids."

Call it the reverse Elian Gonzales rule.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (E4Afo)

74 How about an illegal lesbian Syrian whilst were at it?
Posted by: cheshirecat

How about we change the y to a b?

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (DZ9Lv)

75 So...what now?
Along with the moslem infection there is a narrowing gap of survival.
Sorry Fenlonspoke, but the harsh truth is violence will likely come from all that do-goodery of the recent past. Probably for carving out an island of retreat if nothing else.

What solutions to the on-going troubles do any Morons have? More talky talk? Some hopes and prayers? Putting our future in the Hands of the Almighty for a just and right end?

What? If not that, what?

The moslems will not confer and discuss, they will begin anew to bleed the US and dance and shout. The moss-kuh building projects will start and they will gleefully use Christian churches as anchors for the New Middle East. Your asses will be in the air five times a day and you'll LIKE it you raysis or you'll be enslaved or dead.

"Not aaallll..." Spare me the explanations of population assortment, please. The US is going exactly the way of Yerrp and the UK and I don't see a plan to prevent it.

Posted by: He who questions all of it at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (pcjfs)

76 The Democrats are right, we need to pack the court. Now. LOL

Posted by: Mad Max in VA at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (udRx+)

77 No men in women's sports, I mean.

Crumbs from the table so the left can call SCOTUS a bunch of right-wing fascists, even as the court gives them the feast.

Posted by: Taq, Rickrolled by Jesus at June 30, 2026 12:29 PM (IhL8c)

78 Well, the USA lasted 249 years. More than the Europeans thought it would.

This ruling really went above and beyond to put an exclamation point on such an absurd reasoning.

All they had to say was Congress needs to address this, not an EO. But clearly Roberts and Barrett like fucking us.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:30 PM (kmOt8)

79 That's kinda my feeling about this. If it had never been heard, what would be different?
Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 12:27 PM (DZ9Lv)

We could have continued to tell ourselves that maybe things could change.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:30 PM (orF8y)

80 Anchor babies and vote fraud are both core & salient features of our ruling class' Current Year Project, and they won't countenance any contradiction from the Court or Congress, and these ruling class Institutions wish to remain ruling class Institutions, so they won't offer it.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 12:25 PM (BI5O2)

boom. this.

(I like Current Year Project, good phrase reflecting modern attitude)

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at June 30, 2026 12:30 PM (VyBeY)

81 I think the reconstruction amendments are unconstitutional.

Posted by: Reforger at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (0dsIZ)

82 "Well, the USA lasted 249 years. More than the Europeans thought it would."

Well, we shall be remembered for our air conditioning, massive stadia, and Ranch dressing and Texas BBQ at least. It's a good legacy to leave behind.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (E4Afo)

83 "What? If not that, what?" That's a poser fer sure.

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (Jr5Lq)

84 Great few days for America in time for the 4th! Trump getting pounded over and over by the Supremes!

Posted by: Sid at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (/lHN7)

85 Where's the guy who always defended McConnell because "at least he got good judicial appointments?"

Thanks for nothing, guy.

Posted by: San Franpsycho at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (RIvkX)

86 Eric Schmitt is a Senator to watch in the future. Although a first termer heis determined to not be a back bench drone. And, get this, his mind is right.

Posted by: tubal at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (Gqar8)

87 We have lost nothing. We are where we were 24 hours ago. Sure, if we won it would have been Absolutely Fucking Yuge.

It's like playing the Powerball. If you win, your life is changed forever. If you lose, your life isn't changed at all. You've lost nothing.
Posted by: Elric The Blade

==

I think though officially ajudicating this and letting the world know is a step backwards.

I wouldnt be surprised if you suddenly see hundreds of thousands if not millions now claim to be US citizens since they were born here?

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (kmOt8)

88
Which mean is won't happen.

The foreigners control the vote producing and counting procedures of too many states for that to be possible.
Posted by: Methos

=============

If we can keep up with the border control and the de-frauding of the vote, our kids might get it overturned when they're 29 like us.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (XJ22o)

89
Well, we shall be remembered for our air conditioning, massive stadia, and Ranch dressing and Texas BBQ at least. It's a good legacy to leave behind.
Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (E4Afo)


And Buc-Ee's!

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (7Q7Ca)

90 "I wonder if Barrett and Roberts have any comprehension of what they've done?"

They have pleased the communist pope

Posted by: Victor Tango Kilo at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (Aol+p)

91 All they had to say was Congress needs to address this, not an EO. But clearly Roberts and Barrett like fucking us.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:30 PM (kmOt

And that sucks, because I hate fucking Roberts.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (orF8y)

92 Where's the guy who always defended McConnell because "at least he got good judicial appointments?"

Thanks for nothing, guy.
Posted by: San Franpsycho

==

Obviously McConnell sucks but Trump put Barrett there. Because he didnt want another rape opp like they did to Kavanaugh.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:33 PM (kmOt8)

93 Sadly, this will all end in blood, as has always been the case. Time after time, country after country, the 'elites' are presented with the opportunity to turn away from the coming slaughter and always they refuse. I don't know when or where it will start but it is as sure as the sun rising in the east.

Only a politician, or a lawyer, or a combination of the two could miss it.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 30, 2026 12:33 PM (ExV1e)

94 They screwed us

Posted by: Skip at June 30, 2026 12:33 PM (sgkY8)

95 Kind of weird that the two justices with foreign born adopted children are the leads in this decision. I'm not sure what , if anything, it means

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM (f6yx7)

96 though I gotta say, The Blade up @ 53 makes a valid point, too.

not a step back; we are just where we were yesterday.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM (VyBeY)

97 Today is a good flearing all around.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM (KqZez)

98 What a shocking turn of events. There are your McConell judges everyone always loved.

Posted by: Jak Sucio at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM (Aoykm)

99
How about we change the y to a b?
Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal

===============

The r to a b.

And you made me get that in my browser history again, dammit.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM (XJ22o)

100 Wong Kim Ark?
Does that come with an egg roll?
Posted by: Not exactly a legal scholar at June 30, 2026 12:18 PM

Only if you order six.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at June 30, 2026 12:35 PM (kgE5c)

101 Foreigners applying for immigrant visas and certain non-immigrant visas are required to pass a medical examination conducted by a physician approved by a US Embassy or consulate.

_________________________

So, block entrance to any female 7 months pregnant or later. That takes care of the legal applicants. And, those illegally crossing the border illegally, are basically down to nil.

Posted by: Orson at June 30, 2026 12:35 PM (dIske)

102 Ace,
Great coverage and write-up
Am hitting the tip jar.

Posted by: Diogenes at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (2WIwB)

103 The elites on really both sides of the aisle just have no idea what is happening. They see a brown nosing servant of theirs that works for cheap when they interact with illegal aliens. They think its no big deal.

They dont see entire cities that look like the 3rd world full of these people.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (kmOt8)

104 I thought the Court had already interpreted the 14th a couple times already to give us this shit. That's what I had been saying. I read it years ago.

I also expected the current court to enshrine this shit but I had hoped they wouldn't.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (KqZez)

105 "The r to a b.

And you made me get that in my browser history again, dammit."

Oh, now I get it. Syrian-->Sybian.

Why not? Some of the Justices just love riding us and f*cking up over.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (E4Afo)

106 We need a real conservative justice to at least win most of these 5-4.

==

Yes we do. And then we can revisit and reverse this pile.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (ugc0u)

107 " ... and always they refuse. "

*in a Cowardly Lion voice*

"Ain't it the truth? Ain't it the truth!"

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at June 30, 2026 12:36 PM (VyBeY)

108 I'd love to see President Trump get the military funded and anything else truly essential and then just veto everything until this is fixed and the SAVE Act passed.

After the mid- terms.

Go out on a warpath....

Posted by: Stateless - He ain't heavy, he's my dog at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (Sco7b)

109 I always say the only good thing Mitch did was keep Garland off the SC

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (f6yx7)

110 Roberts and Barrett sure love them some birth tourism.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (ugc0u)

111 This case was always going to be an uphill climb. The text of the 14th amendment is pretty non-restrictive aside from Indians. You have to go into the same kind of weeds liberals use to deny the plain text of the 2nd amendment to make the 14th mean what we want.

Relying on SCOTUS to fix Congress' century-long refusal to do their fucking job is not the solution.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (QZThv)

112
We have lost nothing. We are where we were 24 hours ago.

Posted by: Elric The Blade

===============

Not quite, because the decision referred to the amendment itself. Even if Congress passed a law restricting birthright citizenship per our wishes, how would it even be granted cert? "We already decided that." The fundamental is already settled.

But I also don't know much about try, try again in this context.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (XJ22o)

113 Hey America, Celebrate 250 Years.

We had a good run. I feel highly blessed that for that flash of human history that only a few hundred million people could enjoy a true High Trust, prosperous and freedom loving country
that tens of billions of people over the span of world history never got to really experience, that I was here for the majority of my life to enjoy it.

Now returning to the Thousand Years of Darkness as the last bastion of high trust society (save perhaps Japan - for now) that all of Creation has had to endure since expulsion from The Garden.

Posted by: Community Notes at June 30, 2026 12:38 PM (U4c/V)

114 How long until there will be more US citizens who fully grew up in China than live within our own borders?

Posted by: Tinfoil Dispenser at June 30, 2026 12:38 PM (ERYKL)

115 Well, the USA lasted 249 years. More than the Europeans thought it would.

This ruling really went above and beyond to put an exclamation point on such an absurd reasoning.
-
And yet people will still pretend to have something to celebrate on Saturday.

Posted by: Methos at June 30, 2026 12:38 PM (vSvIl)

116 Roberts and Barrett sure love them some birth tourism.
Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (ugc0u)


We know who's bought and paid for by China. That f*cking billionaire asshole that's funding the destruction of the US along side Soros is a REAL pain in the ass.

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:38 PM (7Q7Ca)

117 The United States of America stands in the way. And because it stands in the way, it must be destroyed.

It is altogether too powerful, rich and free. Its people are straightforward, industrious, largely content, and barring grievous provocation, peaceful. When roused, there is no force on earth that can contend against us when we are angry and united in purpose.

So, our destruction is to be carried out from within.

God willing, the people will be roused, and will motivate the frauds who "represent" us to change the ridiculous situation that now permits our enemies to claim citizenship, diluting not only our rights as actual citizens, but forever tarnishing the glory of US citizenship.

Posted by: Happy 250 USA it was a great run baby at June 30, 2026 12:38 PM (jvkDG)

118 The r to a b.
And you made me get that in my browser history again, dammit.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia

I'm still working on my 2nd cuppa. But I'm glad you fixed it for me. Your browser history includes a certain purchase?

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (DZ9Lv)

119 "Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain"

They'll get to it right after the SAVE Act.

Posted by: fd at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (MWfyi)

120 always say the only good thing Mitch did was keep Garland off the SC

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (f6yx7)

And that was for Hillary.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (KqZez)

121
So vile that Barrett and Roberts did this the week of the 250th. There won't be a 300th for sure.
Posted by: Josh Brolin's Blistered Taint

Will there be a 260th?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (Cqx++)

122 Great, black pillers arrived. No, America is not over, and a setback with the Liberals Roberts and Barrett is not the death of the USA as we know it.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (ugc0u)

123

GW Bush is a piece of trash.

Because he is such a piece of shit, I actually do wonder about how all those sand lawyers made it to the cockpits of those planes.

Kinda all very convenient.

Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz PhD Esq at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (et1vG)

124 I think the tax code is the way to address at least some of this.

Congress has wide latitude on passing tax legislation, usually just needs a bare majority. Not the 60+ Senators.

Tax the fuck out of any foreigner that touches our soil. If they have a kid here, that's a tax. Our tax code has all sorts of provisions for people living abroad.

This has ALWAYS been about money for these people. You take away that incentive and these people wont be a problem.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (kmOt8)

125
81 I think the reconstruction amendments are unconstitutional.
Posted by: Reforger at June 30, 2026 12:31 PM (0dsIZ)

LOL. Did you know that among legal scholars, the 14th has long had the reputation as being the Amendment that Swallowed the Constitution and rewrote it completely, in its own image?

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (orF8y)

126 "Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain"

They'll get to it right after the SAVE Act.
Posted by: fd"

And then...

Posted by: Guy who always says "Nothing will happen" and is usually right at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (MWfyi)

127 The block quotes are formatted weird today. Props to ace for the new html tomfoolery!
Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:13 PM (8mulE)


Just be happy we're not dealing with grey boxes, italicans, bold underlines and blown margins........

Posted by: Sponge - F*ck Cancer at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (7Q7Ca)

128 An executive order was a quick way to fix it. It did not work. We need a better way.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (ugc0u)

129 Roberts and Barrett sure love them some birth tourism.
==
Check me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall Barrett adopted a foreign kid, and so did Roberts.

Just an observation.

Posted by: Happy 250 USA it was a great run baby at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (jvkDG)

130 Tax 'em. Tax the hell out of them.

Posted by: What my dad would've said at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (2Ez/1)

131 95 Kind of weird that the two justices with foreign born adopted children are the leads in this decision. I'm not sure what , if anything, it means
Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 12:34 PM

It means nothing because the citizenship of those children were not at issue. Those children have parents who are citizens. They are citizens under a section of the constitution not in dispute. A legally adopted child is absolutely no different than a child who was biologically born to the adoptive parents. This includes their birth certificates listing the parents and there is zero notation of an adoption on a birth certificate.

Posted by: Piper at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (p4NUW)

132 "Let 100 million Chinese birth tourists bloom ... "

Mao and Xi

Posted by: illiniwek at June 30, 2026 12:41 PM (vbXSk)

133 USSC has no use for FACTS or LOGIC!!!!

Posted by: We're demographically fucked at June 30, 2026 12:41 PM (TbWk/)

134
Your browser history includes a certain purchase?
Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal

===============

Your honor, I was merely conducting research.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:41 PM (XJ22o)

135 If we can keep up with the border control and the de-frauding of the vote, our kids might get it overturned when they're 29 like us.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:32 PM (XJ22o)

Yeah, I'm sure we can trust the normies to pay attention long enough to see it through.

As long as gas is cheap.

Posted by: Methos at June 30, 2026 12:42 PM (vSvIl)

136 An executive order was a quick way to fix it. It did not work. We need a better way.
Posted by: runner
==
I like where Trump was coming from, but I dont think he understood the gamble and what happens if you lose.

This was basically the worst case scenario and the question has now been answered.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:42 PM (kmOt8)

137 What solutions to the on-going troubles do any Morons have? More talky talk?
-----

Nah I think putting violent threats online is probably the smart way to go. Litter ace's hard earned pages with it to show how conservative and "tough" we all are. Then it's not just talk.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:42 PM (KqZez)

138 The place called United States isn’t over. It will exist as a physical place. The American you and I think of when we think America is long gone. That went away about 20 years ago.
Posted by: Heroq at June 30, 2026 12:41 PM (Y6Wgg)

Welll, No one told me ! If someone told me , I would have moved to Switzerland !

🤪

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:42 PM (ugc0u)

139 @111

>>Relying on SCOTUS to fix Congress' century-long refusal to do their fucking job is not the solution.

This isn't even a congress thing anymore, SCOTUS has ruled that anyone born in the US regardless of circumstances is a US Citizen as enshrined in the 14th.

Forget about amendments, that's not happening, ever.

So again, the only way forward is rigorous interior, border and visa enforcement.

Posted by: Thomas Bender at June 30, 2026 12:42 PM (XV/Pl)

140 Why not colonize/conquer the whole world to make this a moot point?

Posted by: Serious Cat at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM (xqQi7)

141 "The place called United States isn’t over. It will exist as a physical place. The American you and I think of when we think America is long gone."

E pluribus pluribus. From many, many.

Posted by: gp at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM (Jr5Lq)

142 Hey...

Maybe the Constitution really IS a suicide pact!

#mindblown

Posted by: Don Black at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM (ZxPkt)

143 Tariffs were another challenge to a core & salient feature of our ruling class' Current Year Project, and look at how that came acropper, for instruction.

This is a globalist project, and the national governments who enact this agenda barely matter in these calculations, except as executors... how much do you think any of these people care about the wishes of the people they lord over, and whose interests are *not* in play?

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM (BI5O2)

144 Can't every Dreamer just say "actually I was born here" and just get rubber stamped as citizens?

How do you disprove what an illegal alien did or did not do?

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM (kmOt8)

145 We have lost nothing. We are where we were 24 hours ago.

Posted by: Elric The Blade

===============

Not quite, because the decision referred to the amendment itself. Even if Congress passed a law restricting birthright citizenship per our wishes, how would it even be granted cert? "We already decided that." The fundamental is already settled.

But I also don't know much about try, try again in this context.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (XJ22o)
______

There was zero-point-zero chance that Congress was ever gonna do shit about this. Punting it to Congress would have gotten us nowhere. Congress is effectively an enemy of the American people, conspiring with foreign invaders to take us over. That's why Trump took the shot that he did.

We had BRC yesterday. We have it today. We'll have it forever. That's just reality.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (iFTx/)

146
One thing I'm curious about, do dissents ever come up in subsequent cases? I suppose this could come back to a different court someday. Would Thomas's dissent be quotable as an argument to overturn Trump vs Barbara?

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (XJ22o)

147 Heinlein had it right. When we start America over, citizenship must be earned. No more magic soul or letting retards vote.

Posted by: Victor Tango Kilo at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (4eAUY)

148 110 Roberts and Barrett sure love them some birth tourism.
Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (ugc0u)

Check out their kids. A window to what they think. Perhaps. Maybe.

Posted by: tubal at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (Gqar8)

149 wait, what happened to commenter Heroq ??

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (ugc0u)

150 @129

>>Just an observation.

Roberts Adopted Irish Venezuelans and Barret adopted African Asians.

Very queer.

Posted by: Thomas Bender at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (XV/Pl)

151 I just looked up Senator Schmitt. He's the guy who made that diving catch in the congressional baseball game. Wrote a book "How to Beat the Left in Court." So maybe the right temperament for a good fight.

Posted by: Wenda at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (AZWHC)

152 Still doesn't mean the parents are citizens. First plane, train, get on your horse and ride, for them. They can take their American citizen offspring with them or into foster care for them.

Posted by: nooneyouknowyouknow at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (Iwv3U)

153 I have no idea what's going to happen next week. Much less what's going to happen 20 years from now,

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (2sfNr)

154 wait, what happened to commenter Heroq ??

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (ugc0u)

Whatever has happened to him many times before

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (KqZez)

155 Check out their kids. A window to what they think. Perhaps. Maybe.
Posted by: tubal at June 30, 2026 12:44 PM (Gqar

I was warned about Barrett when she was nominated. And Roberts...yeah, I want Rehnquist II.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (ugc0u)

156 They were not going to allow the president to do this by executive order. Misconstruing Constitutional provisions is the court's job.

Posted by: Ted Torgerson at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (wGerL)

157 I guess if Roe vs Wade can be overturned, so can this. But by then it will be too late.

But the posters are correct in that Congress can't really "undo" this if its considered a constitutional right by the 14th amendment.

Thats why this ruling is so nasty.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (kmOt8)

158 I guess if Roe vs Wade can be overturned, so can this. But by then it will be too late.

==

There you go.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:46 PM (ugc0u)

159 145 We have lost nothing. We are where we were 24 hours ago.

Posted by: Elric The Blade

===============

Not quite, because the decision referred to the amendment itself. Even if Congress passed a law restricting birthright citizenship per our wishes, how would it even be granted cert? "We already decided that." The fundamental is already settled.

But I also don't know much about try, try again in this context.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:37 PM (XJ22o)
______

There was zero-point-zero chance that Congress was ever gonna do shit about this. Punting it to Congress would have gotten us nowhere. Congress is effectively an enemy of the American people, conspiring with foreign invaders to take us over. That's why Trump took the shot that he did.

We had BRC yesterday. We have it today. We'll have it forever. That's just reality.
Posted by: Elric The Blade
=======
Probably not because the nation will cease to exist. Like the Dred Scott decision, this judicial activist decision (a non judicial activist decision would have punted it to Congress), is likely to hasten the breakup of the US. Probably violently.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:46 PM (E4rtv)

160 If the support is there, it can happen quickly.
Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (8mulE)

The way I understand it is this:

To even begin this, 2/3rds of the States' Legislatures would have to request this process to begin.

States then have to elect Delegates to go and propose the Amendment

Immediate butt fuckery immediately would ensue as some would demand 2nd Amendment be deleted amongst a fuck ton of other ridiculous non-sense. Not to mention all the Grandstanding for Social Media Click Bait.

We wouldn't even get past step 1. But if it did, In the end nothing would get done. Because it is now obvious some States/Territories have turned this little loophole into Big Money via Birth Tourism, Federal Welfare Bucks, and Manipulating the Census to rig representation in the House.

We wouldn't even get a stupid T-Shirt for this. And everyone would have horrible hangovers.

Posted by: tryhardneckbeard at June 30, 2026 12:47 PM (lLeLE)

161 Save Act is 80/20 issue.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:47 PM (ugc0u)

162 I wonder if the ruling would have been different if Europe was burning and all of their leaders and intellectual elites were being chased through the streets, tortured, and dismembered?

After watching their families be brutally slaughtered and having everything taken away.

The marshmallows to cure anger, frustration and depression haven't kicked in yet.

Others are right. There are other ways to fight this.

Posted by: Stateless - He ain't heavy, he's my dog at June 30, 2026 12:47 PM (Sco7b)

163 Whatever has happened to him many times before
Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (KqZez)

New name, same old guy, right on schedule.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 12:47 PM (BI5O2)

164 Whatever has happened to him many times before

He's a concerned Christian. Sometimes the mask slips.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 12:47 PM (QZThv)

165 have no idea what's going to happen next week.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at June 30, 2026 12:45 PM (2sfNr)

This is why they say never meet your heroes. Feet of clay

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:48 PM (KqZez)

166 We had BRC yesterday. We have it today. We'll have it forever. That's just reality.
Posted by: Elric The Blade

==

I guess I'n the Eeyore here, but I would argue at least legally, we did not.

We never had a SC determine that all illegals born here are automatic US citizens. We do today.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:48 PM (kmOt8)

167 Birthright citizenship, as it is currently applied, rests on a court decision to mean “any child born in the US under any circumstances”. The interpretation of ‘resident’ is wildly broad. This is currently insanity, when illegal aliens and citizens of other countries deliberately come here to drop children with US citizenship. There’s a statistic I’ve seen where China alone will have a million children with US voting rights in a few years.

The Trump EO was and is not the proper vehicle for revising the existing interpretation, but I had hoped the ensuing court case would. The oral arguments seemed to miss the point, and possibly the entire case before the Supremes was too narrow to alter the existing interpretation.

IMO, the Constitutional amendment is fine as written, the interpretation of resident is insane. We have too much of congress that has been bought by globalists to fix the situation by either legislation or amendment. If this court couldn’t see the need to fix this issue, I fear it remains unfixable.

Posted by: Advo at June 30, 2026 12:48 PM (jO4mz)

168
There was zero-point-zero chance that Congress was ever gonna do shit about this. Punting it to Congress would have gotten us nowhere. Congress is effectively an enemy of the American people, conspiring with foreign invaders to take us over. That's why Trump took the shot that he did.

We had BRC yesterday. We have it today. We'll have it forever. That's just reality.
Posted by: Elric The Blade

=================

Ick. True.

Well, fire up the remedies. Like I said above, get fucking serious about the federal felony of failing to register for the draft, regardless of where you are on the planet. Any Birthright Boy who shows up here who didn't register by age 25 goes to Leavenworth, for the maximum sentence.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:48 PM (XJ22o)

169 Anchor babies forever

Oh well, all things die, even nations. Especially nations, frankly.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards, buy ammo at June 30, 2026 12:49 PM (xcxpd)

170 There's not going to be a COnstitutional Amendment to fix this, we can't even get voter ID to 50 votes in the Senate.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:49 PM (kmOt8)

171 Constitutional Amendment to fix this is a pipe dream. Don;t even go there.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (ugc0u)

172 There was zero-point-zero chance that Congress was ever gonna do shit about this.
........
We had BRC yesterday. We have it today. We'll have it forever. That's just reality.
Posted by: Elric The Blade

A truly conservative court would have done something about it as evidenced by the 3

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (KqZez)

173 157 I guess if Roe vs Wade can be overturned, so can this. But by then it will be too late.

But the posters are correct in that Congress can't really "undo" this if its considered a constitutional right by the 14th amendment.

Thats why this ruling is so nasty.
Posted by: Sharpie

Technically, a future court could overturn the decision because the whole 14th Birthright issue was irrelevant to the core holding that the President may not dictate birthright citizenship via an executive order. Thus, obiter dicta on the rest of the blathering by the majority.

So a future court, COULD, mind you, distinguish this decision from a future one if Congress passes a law. Immigration and naturalization is a plenary power of Congress, not the courts. If Congress even wanted to, it could also do a Bricker amendment stripping the Court of any jurisdiction in immigration cases (see Ex Parte McCardle).

But the current limp dicked Senate majority under Thune would never even consider it nor would it blow up the filibuster over it. Corporations want their cheap ass labor yo.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (E4rtv)

174 103. They dont see entire cities that look like the 3rd world full of these people.
Posted by: Sharpie

Hell. They don't see the other half of their counties abutting on those cities because they're too busy with environmental issues like grabbing more "greenery" natural land zone buffers, greenway paths, reconstructing round-a-bouts in roads through their towns to make them so much slower to navigate and therefore undesirable for travel. (A Buttigieg stunt in Indiana.)

Oh, and separating major state roads for bike paths, ergo the non-elite can almost NOT drive for fear of striking gig workers, environmentalists, and children that go unattended and wild.

Lastly, they spend a lot of time keeping their children in private schools (including Quaker, Muslim) and "better" universities so they "fit in" with both transnational elitists and our own homegrown commie A-holes.

Posted by: L - No nic, another fine day at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (NFX2v)

175 "Pew Research (for 2023): An estimated 4.6 million U.S.-born children were living with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent. Annual births to unauthorized or temporary-status mothers were about 320,000 (9% of ~3.6 million total U.S. births), with roughly 245,000–300,000 specifically tied to unauthorized parents in recent years."

This does not include a large number of "birth tourists" that returned to China or Mexico (or points unknown) over the decades. It was long ago popular for (even middle class?) Mexicans to give birth in USA so they could at some point claim their prize money.

Posted by: illiniwek at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (vbXSk)

176
John Roberts and his all girl fan club have defined “subject to the jurisdiction of” as including every sentient being inside American boundaries, except for space aliens in UFO’s and Bigfoot. And even they may have a claim.
===
When a Daddy Bigfoot loves a Mommie Space alien very much, and Mommie Space alien give birth on US soil, eventually that offspring can vote!!! Isnt that wonderful.

Posted by: ACB explaining the 14th amendment to her kids and you at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (jvkDG)

177 170 There's not going to be a COnstitutional Amendment to fix this, we can't even get voter ID to 50 votes in the Senate.
Posted by: Sharpie
=========
Well, after the Civil War, the 13th to the 15th that eliminated the Dred Scott decision came about precisely because ratification of such was necessary to rejoin the Union.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (E4rtv)

178


Technically, a future court could overturn the decision because the whole 14th Birthright issue was irrelevant to the core holding that the President may not dictate birthright citizenship via an executive order. Thus, obiter dicta on the rest of the blathering by the majority.

So a future court, COULD, mind you, distinguish this decision from a future one if Congress passes a law. Immigration and naturalization is a plenary power of Congress, not the courts. If Congress even wanted to, it could also do a Bricker amendment stripping the Court of any jurisdiction in immigration cases (see Ex Parte McCardle).

But the current limp dicked Senate majority under Thune would never even consider it nor would it blow up the filibuster over it. Corporations want their cheap ass labor yo.
Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:50 PM (E4rtv)

👆👆

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (ugc0u)

179 Oh well, all things die, even nations. Especially nations, frankly.
Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards, buy ammo at June 30, 2026 12:49 PM (xcxpd

Yup.

Nations aren't your mother, or even a beloved dog.

When they're no longer fit for purpose, toss them in the trash.

This one has been stinking for awhile.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (BI5O2)

180 LOL. Did you know that among legal scholars, the 14th has long had the reputation as being the Amendment that Swallowed the Constitution and rewrote it completely, in its own image?
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (orF8y)

No, but good to know. My arguement comes from Nevada and Vermont. Half the states were not present to grant statehood to them. Therefore that is a recognition of the Southern states being no longer a part of the United States. The United states then defeated the Confererate States of America. A country they recognized and waged war upon. The reconstruction amendments were hurried in before the defeated Confederate States America went through the voting to join again. The newly conquered territories were not and still are not part of the United States as spelled out in the Constitution OR Nevada and Vermont aren't.

Posted by: Reforger at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (0dsIZ)

181 *That is not a middle finger! It's an index finger!

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (ugc0u)

182 Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain:

Let's see. Two hundred or so comments. Surely someone has said of this constitutional amendment: Ain't never gonna pass, right?

Posted by: OrangeEnt at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (1Ff7Z)

183 I write it yesterday so this is only a repeat: SCOTUS sucks. When they get it right (and to be fair they’ve been right a lot recently) it’s really only by accident. Blind squirrels and acorns…

Regardless, I’m deeply offended that every year we sit around with bated breath awaiting the “wisdom” to be passed down from on high by 9 mediocrities in black robes. That is the opposite of representative government… now excuse me while I go chew some nails

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (YetvJ)

184 But chin up, in a deeply conservative red state like West Virginia, a high school is allowed to have a policy doesn't have to let a dude with a dick play on the girls softball team.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (kmOt8)

185
Technically, a future court could overturn the decision because the whole 14th Birthright issue was irrelevant to the core holding that the President may not dictate birthright citizenship via an executive order.

================

I thought the core holding was that the 14th guarantees birthright citizenship, regardless of which branch says otherwise.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (XJ22o)

186 End dual citizenship. That way illegal aliens aren't citizens since they are citizens of their mother's nation. In the case where the parents are not from the same nation, Roberts could logically prevail but if momma's going bye-bye, I bet most would choose to have the child go home with them.

Also, it would make those adults who have chosen to get foreign citizenship surrender their US citizenship.

Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (6BjcW)

187 Incidentally, Markwayne Mullin said we'll have exceeded the 2025 total of deportations by mid-August. So on pace to almost double, and that's not counting self-deports.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (QZThv)

188 I'm just surprised the Supremes didn't wait until Friday to drop the ruling, just to dig the knife in even more.

"Happy 4th of July, everyone. Have fun at the wake."

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (E4Afo)

189 Stop all immigration and do not allow any female tourist.
No more hib.
We do not need any more people here.
Tourists require a passport which is issued at our discretion.

Posted by: MAC V SOG at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (P4Pk9)

190 A real pain in the ass and with all of this text, I just couldn't do it.
Posted by: Lamont the Big Dummy at June 30, 2026 12:17 PM (1wjle)

I got to thinking about this and there is a simple way to fix that kind of text in the future.
1. Get Notepad++. It's a freeware text editor for Windows.
2. Paste the text into a new document.
3. Go to the Edit menu and choose Replace.
4. Put in \r\n in the "Find what" box.
5. Put a space in the "Replace with" box.

Done! all the hard coded new lines will be replaced with a single space. If needed, you can always add line breaks as you see fit.

Much easier than doing all that by hand.

Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (8mulE)

191 Mama always said, "SCOTUS is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get."

Posted by: Forest Gump at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (wVcYX)

192 Incidentally, Markwayne Mullin said we'll have exceeded the 2025 total of deportations by mid-August.

==

when he was not in charge..OK! Good Work!

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (ugc0u)

193 Turnaround visibly pregnant women.

Ai say dogs can smell pregnancy.
That will catch some (most) of the early stages.

Make them sign a paper acknowledging that it is a felony crime to defraud the US gov and give birth while on Visa. You're anchor baby may be a US citizen but you're going to break rocks for a spell. Also you'll never be allowed in US again.

Every visting women must visit a pregnancy check clinic every 2 months and subject to urine test.

Posted by: hate_the_deepstate at June 30, 2026 12:53 PM (2Dncg)

194 How would about a quarter to a third of the states withdrawal & fix drivers licenses that can allow non citizen voting in their states?

Posted by: L - No nic, another fine day at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (NFX2v)

195 It means nothing because the citizenship of those children were not at issue. Those children have parents who are citizens. They are citizens under a section of the constitution not in dispute. A legally adopted child is absolutely no different than a child who was biologically born to the adoptive parents. This includes their birth certificates listing the parents and there is zero notation of an adoption on a birth certificate.
Posted by: Piper at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (p4NUW)

It speaks to the disloyalty of their parents to the nation.

Posted by: Methos at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (vSvIl)

196 Vermont was admitted as the 14th state in the 1790s, Reforger. You thinking of West Virginia?

Posted by: Bulg at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (77rzZ)

197 The good news is when the Court is fully leftard we won't have any more June suspense about the decisions. Or November. Or any time.

In fact the true suspense will be what cases they take up and even that will only be the ones where they can do lasting damage.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (KqZez)

198 I guess I'n the Eeyore here, but I would argue at least legally, we did not.

We never had a SC determine that all illegals born here are automatic US citizens. We do today.

Posted by: Sharpie

De facto Elric is right. But this shoves the unpleasant mess into the political system and is likely to be a new litmus test for any GOP appointed justice--and Roberts just stained his tattered judicial legacy even more. ACB will have a similar legacy to Sandra Day O'Conner who made a mess of constitutional interpretation.

Court decisions on the Constitution are not meant to be warm fuzzy self congratulatory social virtue signalling.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (E4rtv)

199
I’m deeply offended that every year we sit around with bated breath awaiting the “wisdom” to be passed down from on high by 9 mediocrities in black robes.

Posted by: LinusVanPelt

=============

Caesar's thumb. We still live that way.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:55 PM (XJ22o)

200 Someone noted this morning that both Barrett and Roberts have adopted children from foreign countries. Mmmm, makes one wonder.

Posted by: Jen the original at June 30, 2026 12:55 PM (EUX8s)

201 LOL. Did you know that among legal scholars, the 14th has long had the reputation as being the Amendment that Swallowed the Constitution and rewrote it completely, in its own image?
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:39 PM (orF8y)

I've been calling it the "Kitchen Sink Amendment" for years.

Posted by: pookysgirl at June 30, 2026 12:55 PM (OzDqF)

202 The reconstruction amendments were hurried in before the defeated Confederate States America went through the voting to join again. The newly conquered territories were not and still are not part of the United States as spelled out in the Constitution OR Nevada and Vermont aren't.
Posted by: Reforger at June 30, 2026 12:51 PM (0dsIZ)

You’re not wrong, but…. People take this the wrong way, and don’t quite understand the truth of it.

But in a very real sense, the original Constitution died at Appomattox.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 12:55 PM (orF8y)

203 Fine.

Every illegal in this country needs to register for the draft before they can receive any benefits.

They're subject to the jurisdiction thereof now. Get subjected to it.

Posted by: Washington Nearsider: Gotterdammerung, DURING PRIDE MONTH IS EVIL! at June 30, 2026 12:56 PM (xA5g+)

204 With due respect, the Court's account is not historically
accurate. The Court says that the Citizenship Clause in-
corporated the English feudal principle that subjects owed
lifetime servitude to the King who owned the soil on which
they were born, but Americans--unsurprisingly--rejected
this feudal principle.
_____

"With due respect,". This is great. How much respect is due to someone who gets the most basic thing wrong? Very little, I would say, and I suspect that's what Thomas is saying here.

Also, whatever happened to "No Kings"!

Posted by: Chuck Martel at June 30, 2026 12:56 PM (Dv3i1)

205 We won't have Thomas and Alito forever.

Posted by: Eromero at June 30, 2026 12:56 PM (LHPAg)

206 And no more dual citizenship

Posted by: MAC V SOG at June 30, 2026 12:56 PM (P4Pk9)

207 If one ascribes to the idea that we, the US citizens who base our right to be a US citizien on a marketbasket of entanglements, with place of birth but one of them and another being subject to being compeleted to die in war for the nation, this catastrohic birthright ruling guts all that and compels us to hand over our sovereign sense of self and ownership to any interloper that manages to kick in our national front door and loots that which makes us American. Worse is we no longer have any say about any of this. The long road to destroying what it means to being an American citizen finally succeeded. The road to our destruction is now paved. God help us because we can't seem to do it for ourselves anymore.

Posted by: Alteria Pilgram - My President has convictions. at June 30, 2026 12:56 PM (obVEo)

208 "Turnaround visibly pregnant women."

Require a pregnancy test, you're pregnant, you stay at home. No visa.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:57 PM (E4Afo)

209
I can see this is an unpopular decision around here.

But, it's differences of opinion that make horse racing, and luckily, your opinions don't count!

Posted by: Caracalla at June 30, 2026 12:57 PM (BI5O2)

210 It's just sickening that we "technically" have a 6-3 majority but our side constantly finds a way to score a goal for the other team.

Can you imagine if there were 6 justices that were Dem appointed how "bold" they would be with remaking America in their image?

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:57 PM (kmOt8)

211 Unsurprising and yet still disappointing.

Posted by: Darth Randall at June 30, 2026 12:57 PM (dvvVb)

212 If this "birthright citizenship" ruling holds, and is unable to be thwarted by either clarifying legislation or by Constitutional Amendment, then it should become the policy of the United States that every "birthright baby" upon that baby's 18th birthday shall be immediately inducted into the US military, and shall immediately and accordingly report for duty; and that failure to do so is equivalent to desertion, or if that person has fled the US then that person shall be extradited back to the US for a desertions courts martial.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at June 30, 2026 12:58 PM (bufu1)

213 Nations aren't your mother, or even a beloved dog.

When they're no longer fit for purpose, toss them in the trash.

This one has been stinking for awhile.

How many times in the history of mankind has a failed nation or government been replaced by a better one? 1776 was an anomaly and 1991 (USSR) was a mixed bag.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 30, 2026 12:58 PM (vTZFs)

214 Also, it would make those adults who have chosen to get foreign citizenship surrender their US citizenship.
Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey

Noooo!!!!
-Rosie O'Donnell

Posted by: Chuck Martel at June 30, 2026 12:58 PM (Dv3i1)

215 elaboration. I worked with an engineer who was going through the immigration process from India. She said when things would go badly she and her husband would say, "well we can always go back if things get worse." (This was when deep state operatives were stalling visa renewals in Trump I). However, when her baby was born, according to her, she had to burn that bridge because India does not recognize dual citizenship, her baby was American or Indian.

Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey at June 30, 2026 12:58 PM (6BjcW)

216 Any Birthright Boy who shows up here who didn't register by age 25 goes to Leavenworth, for the maximum sentence.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia

It's not the draft, it's selective service and it needs to be extended to females too.

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 12:58 PM (DZ9Lv)

217 Court decisions on the Constitution are not meant to be warm fuzzy self congratulatory social virtue signalling.
Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (E4rtv)
Aye aye!

Posted by: Eromero at June 30, 2026 12:59 PM (LHPAg)

218 196 Vermont was admitted as the 14th state in the 1790s, Reforger. You thinking of West Virginia?
Posted by: Bulg at June 30, 2026 12:54 PM (77rzZ)

Maybe. Been a while since I have thought about it.

Posted by: Reforger at June 30, 2026 12:59 PM (0dsIZ)

219 Third world adoption was always a flaming red flag with that one. The only missing element to white woman virtue signaling was not transing them.

Posted by: Josh Brolin's Blistered Taint at June 30, 2026 12:59 PM (Oungn)

220
>>Just an observation.

Roberts Adopted Irish Venezuelans and Barret adopted African Asians.

Very queer.
==
Yup. A person's background and life decisions tell you more about them than their political party affiliation.

That and danger hair. And a job as a college professor.

Posted by: observer at June 30, 2026 12:59 PM (jvkDG)

221 "It's not the draft, it's selective service and it needs to be extended to females too."

Bring back the compulsory 2 year service in the Forces as well.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 12:59 PM (E4Afo)

222 A nation has a right to protect itself.
Anchor babies are just another facet of invasion....NOT immigration.

Posted by: Diogenes at June 30, 2026 01:00 PM (2WIwB)

223 Third world adoption was always a flaming red flag with that one. The only missing element to white woman virtue signaling was not transing them.
====
there's still time!!!

Posted by: ACB at June 30, 2026 01:00 PM (jvkDG)

224 Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 12:48 PM (XJ22o)

American citizens living abroad have to pay income taxes on their worldwide income. There is a Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, but it does not cover investment income. I want billions of taxes collected from these people. Freeze accounts.

Posted by: Ted Torgerson at June 30, 2026 01:00 PM (wGerL)

225 I don't know if (BI5O2) is an intentional troll or not (hence, no quote) but technically, it ain't wrong.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 30, 2026 01:00 PM (vTZFs)

226 How many times in the history of mankind has a failed nation or government been replaced by a better one? 1776 was an anomaly and 1991 (USSR) was a mixed bag.

The USSR breakup went well for pretty much everyone except Russia itself, if you're resigned to the fact that the Balkans are gonna Balkan.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:00 PM (QZThv)

227 I thought the core holding was that the 14th guarantees birthright citizenship, regardless of which branch says otherwise.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia
======
Nope, it is obiter dicta, not that you would get that from the media. There was no law of Congress at issue in the case (cites to the citizenship laws of 1940 were not core to the case). In this case, like Wong Ark Kim, it dealt with administrative actions only, not the power of Congress.

So yes, like the death penalty, if Congress speaks, another bite at the apple is possible (especially as Kavanaugh argues just this point in his concurrence. Happened quite a bit over Roe jurisprudence.

So it takes one justice being replaced on the current court majority and by making the ruling prospective based on a new Congressional law, removes the messiness of revoking current citizenship.

Trump forced the court majority to rub its faces in shit with this decision and it is probably not going to be as long lived as ACB or Roberts would have hoped. And it blows up for good the rather stupid arguments put forward by Shipwrecked Crew commentator that ACB and Roberts are pragmatists. This as far from pragmatic as it can be.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (E4rtv)

228 An executive order was a quick way to fix it. It did not work. We need a better way.
Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 12:40 PM (ugc0u)

Oooh, call me! Call me!!

Posted by: Sanders at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (5xuJ/)

229
Eric Schmitt will introduce a Constitutional amendment to wipe away this stain

=================

I'm good with this. Although it has failed, the Equal Rights Amendment was good for whipping up attention, feminist activism, and money-raising for decades. That is, it helped the people who were pushing it.

Maybe at some point -- like the next 9/11 -- sentiments on BR will have changed.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (XJ22o)

230 And this is what we get with a 6-3 majority.

Man, Republicans weren't kidding when they said they can't do anything until they have two veto proof supermajorities, the Presidency, a 9-0 Supreme Court, academia, the insurance industry, the arts, Broadway, Rosie O'Donnell's house, The View, the filthy liberal microbes on Robert DeNiro's taint, and a 60 plus percent majority of alien life forms, known and unknown.

Then they can get something their voters want done. Donate today.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (KqZez)

231 Well, the left just ignores rulings it opposes.... and suffers no recriminations.

We've got 2 years. Fuck 'em. Ignore it. Ramp up the baby deportations to 11.

Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (jehhT)

232 It's just sickening that we "technically" have a 6-3 majority but our side constantly finds a way to score a goal for the other team.

Can you imagine if there were 6 justices that were Dem appointed how "bold" they would be with remaking America in their image?
Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 12:57 PM (kmOt

ACB and Roberts are modern day Jim Marshall’s…. But they don’t score touchdowns for the other team only once. And they don’t belong in the HoF

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (D2O3S)

233 Too much spinning, and side arguments. Revisit when we have a normal court be and be done with it. Hopefully there will be challenge to some sane law passed by congress, and then 5/4 sane majority will rule the insane notion that the King and his "Jurisdiction" are still relevant in the USA.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (ugc0u)

234

According to Duck Duck Go...

The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (Cqx++)

235 I honestly believe that the trend among my peers and slightly older parents to adopt foreign children - even in cases where they were fertile or even had their own kids - has lead to a desire to "share the wealth" of foreign child support vis-a-vis generous immigration to the USA.

and this.

it's a stain on Gen X tbh. some of the smartest people I know adopted eastern euro kids instead of having their own, not in addition! but because "we don't want to overpopulate"

ok so Mr and Mrs 130 IQ don't procreate instead they're bailing out FAS adopted 30 year old "kids". sounds great.

Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (j+aD2)

236 *rule that the notion that ..not what I typed

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (ugc0u)

237 "Third world adoption was always a flaming red flag with that one. The only missing element to white woman virtue signaling was not transing them."

*looks towards Hollywood actresses*

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (E4Afo)

238 The media of course calls it a " major blow to Trump". Which is all that matters to them. No it is a major blow to the United States.

Posted by: steevy at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (YwEeS)

239 "The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified."

But of course, and they did it tout suite, I bet.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (E4Afo)

240
So yes, like the death penalty, if Congress speaks, another bite at the apple is possible (especially as Kavanaugh argues just this point in his concurrence. Happened quite a bit over Roe jurisprudence.

Posted by: whig

==============

Ah. Thanks for that flarification.

(iykyk -- if you don't know, all will soon be flear)

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (XJ22o)

241 ACB and Roberts are modern day Jim Marshall’s…. But they don’t score touchdowns for the other team only once. And they don’t belong in the HoF
Posted by: LinusVanPelt

If Jim Marshall had played for the '72 Washington Redskins and caught Yepremian's fumble, it would've been 21-0 Miami.

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (DZ9Lv)

242 Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (E4rtv)

I have tried and tried to tell people for years that the Roberts pragmatism or "integrity of the court" line is pure psy op. He is owned and operated through and through. He doesn't give a fuck how anyone sees him or his court, only his masters.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (KqZez)

243 We’re doomed.

Posted by: nurse ratched. at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (EitEl)

244 233 Too much spinning, and side arguments. Revisit when we have a normal court be and be done with it. Hopefully there will be challenge to some sane law passed by congress, and then 5/4 sane majority will rule the insane notion that the King and his "Jurisdiction" are still relevant in the USA.


good prescription runner

yeah and I think the anti-invasion sentiment is rising and it won't be stopped by this or anything else.

so like Nova was saying, just keep pushing on deportation and immigration restrictions

just keep after it. the tide IS turning despite lame-ass "elite" Xers like Amy and John.

Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (j+aD2)

245 So much for "No Kings".

Posted by: Hal Dall MD at June 30, 2026 01:04 PM (xZmOg)

246 Senator Eric Schmitt
@SenEricSchmitt
The Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision is wrong, dangerous, and disastrous for American sovereignty and the American people. If we can't fix it with ordinary legislation, then we must do what the Constitution commands in moments of national crisis: We must amend the Constitution...
_____

Why can't we fix it with legislation? Just get majority passed legislation that says the court got it wrong, put in Thomas' and Alito's dissents, and say the court can't change the meaning of words written by duly elected legislators, and bar the courts from ruling on it any further.

Posted by: Chuck Martel at June 30, 2026 01:04 PM (Dv3i1)

247 Don't like the ruling. But at least Ace has some news this week. Last week he was digging for something or anything.

Posted by: Case at June 30, 2026 01:04 PM (IY9No)

248 Also, it would make those adults who have chosen to get foreign citizenship surrender their US citizenship.
Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey at June 30, 2026 12:52 PM (6BjcW)

I guess you don’t know that SCOTUS has already ruled that laws against dual citizenship are unconstitutional. Did it in the 60’s.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (orF8y)

249 yeah and I think the anti-invasion sentiment is rising and it won't be stopped by this or anything else.

so like Nova was saying, just keep pushing on deportation and immigration restrictions

just keep after it. the tide IS turning despite lame-ass "elite" Xers like Amy and John.
Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:03 PM (j+aD2)

yes , it is absolutely rising, otherwise the Save Act would not be 80/20 issue !

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (ugc0u)

250
Then they can get something their voters want done. Donate today.
Posted by: ...

================

lollol. Another candidate for Top Ten!

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (XJ22o)

251 210 It's just sickening that we "technically" have a 6-3 majority but our side constantly finds a way to score a goal for the other team.

Can you imagine if there were 6 justices that were Dem appointed how "bold" they would be with remaking America in their image?
Posted by: Sharpie

It was really five to four. Kavanaugh had a concurrence that technically joined the majority in ruling Trump did not have that power but punted it to Congress whether it did. And Kavanaugh's concurrence is what needs to be followed by future court litigation. After either Roberts, Sotomayor, or one of the other justices on the majority step down. Or if the GOP decides to call the Dems bluff and expand the court to 13-15 which is not looking that bad now. 13 would make it one justice per circuit.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (E4rtv)

252
Why can't we fix it with legislation? Just get majority passed legislation that says the court got it wrong, put in Thomas' and Alito's dissents, and say the court can't change the meaning of words written by duly elected legislators, and bar the courts from ruling on it any further.

This.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (sKqQm)

253 Don't like the ruling. But at least Ace has some news this week. Last week he was digging for something or anything.

Posted by: Case at June 30, 2026 01:04 PM (IY9No)

It's too much news. It's too much fucking news.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (KqZez)

254 it's a stain on Gen X tbh. some of the smartest people I know adopted eastern euro kids instead of having their own, not in addition! but because "we don't want to overpopulate"

ok so Mr and Mrs 130 IQ don't procreate instead they're bailing out FAS adopted 30 year old "kids". sounds great.
Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (j+aD2)

I’m GenX…. I’m offended!!

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (YetvJ)

255 The media of course calls it a " major blow to Trump". Which is all that matters to them. No it is a major blow to the United States.

Trump is the beam in their eye. It's funny sometimes to listen to NPR while driving and notice how everything is Trump's fault.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 30, 2026 01:07 PM (vTZFs)

256 it's a stain on Gen X tbh. some of the smartest people I know adopted eastern euro kids instead of having their own, not in addition! but because "we don't want to overpopulate"

That's a class thing, not a generational thing. Gen X is responsible for both of Trump's wins.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:07 PM (QZThv)

257 I’m amazed how little citizenship means to these jerks. They can’t even write their majority opinion to make sense. So, expect every pregnant legal/illegal woman to visit our country when close to birth.

Posted by: Unkaren at June 30, 2026 01:07 PM (4P2g0)

258 I guess you don’t know that SCOTUS has already ruled that laws against dual citizenship are unconstitutional. Did it in the 60’s.
Posted by: Tom Servo
=======
Another Warren court era 5-4 decision ripe for overturning.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (E4rtv)

259 I’m GenX…. I’m offended!!

Im Gen X of course too!

I can't tell you how many of my peers - who were and are happily married and not infertile - chose ON PURPOSE to adopt foreign bc "save teh erf"

meanwhile they were stealing those kids in South and Central American and supporting terrible PRC male-child-preference systems.

Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (j+aD2)

260 Can't every Dreamer just say "actually I was born here" and just get rubber stamped as citizens?

==

I thought the exact thing.

"My momma had me in our little one bedroom apartment in Colorado and was too afraid to come out of the shadows to register my birth."

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (qBdHI)

261 BRING BACK REHNQUIST !

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (ugc0u)

262 Or if the GOP decides to call the Dems bluff and expand the court to 13-15 which is not looking that bad now. 13 would make it one justice per circuit.
Posted by: whig

That would be an absolute disaster. You would end up with no clear majority opinion - just a bunch of pluralities and dissents. In fact, you might end up with a bunch of affirmances of circuit court decisions because no majority can agree on a result.

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (DZ9Lv)

263 44 Constitutional amendment? How many years would that take? Ridiculous.
Posted by: Ordinary American at June 30, 2026 12:15 PM (E2lD7)

The support isn't there, so I don't see it happening anytime soon. However, the 26th amendment was passed after only 100 days. That's the one that lowered the voting age to 18 in the 1970s. From the time it passed Congress until the states ratified it: 100 days.

If the support is there, it can happen quickly.
Posted by: No Name Today at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (8mulE)

Then there's the 27th Amendment, which took more than two centuries between being approved by Congress (as part of thr Bill of Rights in 1789) and getting ratified (when Michigan approved it on May 7, 1992.)

Posted by: tankdemon at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (2RJDy)

264 Trump is the beam in their eye. It's funny sometimes to listen to NPR while driving and notice how everything is Trump's fault.

It's the "bitch eating crackers" effect, as AtC taught us on X a few weeks ago. If you really hate someone, everything they do is awful.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (QZThv)

265 I guess you don’t know that SCOTUS has already ruled that laws against dual citizenship are unconstitutional. Did it in the 60’s.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 01:05 PM (orF8y)

I did not know. It kind of flies in the face of the preamble, doesn't it?

Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (6BjcW)

266 supporting terrible PRC male-child-preference systems.
Posted by: Black Orchid

Given China's self-inflicted predicament and likely implosion, why is that so bad?

Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal at June 30, 2026 01:09 PM (DZ9Lv)

267 Democrats can't win elections legally, so this SC decision was pre-ordained.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at June 30, 2026 01:09 PM (CHHv1)

268 257 I’m amazed how little citizenship means to these jerks. They can’t even write their majority opinion to make sense. So, expect every pregnant legal/illegal woman to visit our country when close to birth.
Posted by: Unkaren
=====
They are globalists that float around across borders. Many of those Justices go abroad to Euroland to be feted and celebrated like Roberts. That is the problem in the West, the globalists literally float from nation to nation seeing only Potemkin reflections of problems created by anarchy caused by illegal and legal immigration.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (E4rtv)

269 Given China's self-inflicted predicament and likely implosion, why is that so bad?

Yeah, China is fucked, and the fact that it's their own fault makes it extra delicious.

Now if we could just get feminism kicked out of Japan and Korea so they start having kids again.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (QZThv)

270 More and more I wish Bush had elevated Thomas to the chief justiceship.

Posted by: tankdemon at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (2RJDy)

271 Given China's self-inflicted predicament and likely implosion, why is that so bad?


lol I guess not

those girls are all doing great. some of the other adoptees, not so much.

I just mean it was a pretty big cultural trend 20-30 years ago and it's having its effect now. it affected this ruling.

Posted by: Black Orchid (j+aD2) at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (j+aD2)

272 I did not know. It kind of flies in the face of the preamble, doesn't it?
Posted by: Button Pushing Monkey at June 30, 2026 01:08 PM (6BjcW)

Yep. But as John Roberts will tell you, the Preamble is just “ aspirational”.

Posted by: Tom Servo at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (orF8y)

273 I found the news "racist thing" in a post by one Kiandria Demone...helping your kids by a house.

Someone posted that she recently found out some people help their kids come up with a down payment and Demone's response? Its racism. Because only white people do it.

Now...I suspect East Asians, Indians, etc all do it as well because most people do want to help their kids and if you have the resources to do so will but good to know this is yet another racist thing.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (sKqQm)

274 "The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified."

But of course, and they did it tout suite, I bet.
Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (E4Afo)

Fun fact: It required 203 years to be ratified. A feat only possible because the amendment did not include an expiration date.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (ExV1e)

275 I'm thinking John Roberts may have been more destructive than Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (kmOt8)

276
expect every pregnant legal/illegal woman to visit our country when close to birth.
Posted by: Unkaren

===============

There are remedies. Sorry for reposting a gazillion times, but obviously pregnant women entering on tourist visas have to open their wallets to Border Patrol to show that they have enough money to cover labor and delivery if they pop before their visa expires.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (XJ22o)

277 140 Why not colonize/conquer the whole world to make this a moot point?
Posted by: Serious Cat at June 30, 2026 12:43 PM

*bats eyelashes*

Posted by: Greenland at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (2Ez/1)

278 I have tried and tried to tell people for years that the Roberts pragmatism or "integrity of the court" line is pure psy op. He is owned and operated through and through. He doesn't give a fuck how anyone sees him or his court, only his masters.

--

When I'd read he was very good friends with Boasberg, that cinched it. Not that I didn't believe what I always knew him to be prior, but yeah, that sealed it. He's a disgrace. And he doesn't care.

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (qBdHI)

279 I think America is the bitch eating crackers.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (KqZez)

280 We can tell the middle class left to enjoy the birthright citizenship right while you can, because soon the hardcore left will shoot you in the head

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (f6yx7)

281 In the interest of keeping families together, send them all back to Their country of origin. The kids can come back when they’re 18 and then serve in the military. They can go visit mom and dad and abuela.

Posted by: nurse ratched. at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (Xwwcf)

282 I’m amazed how little citizenship means to these jerks. They can’t even write their majority opinion to make sense. So, expect every pregnant legal/illegal woman to visit our country when close to birth.
===
The USA is a free block party. Except you don't have to live on the block. Just waltz in and eat and drink all you want for free! What could possibly go wrong!

Posted by: All the idiots on the Supreme Court at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (jvkDG)

283 I'm thinking John Roberts may have been more destructive than Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

===

We new exactly where Ginsburg stood, no gaslighting.

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (ugc0u)

284 "Fun fact: It required 203 years to be ratified. A feat only possible because the amendment did not include an expiration date."

Ah. I would have thought any amendment to feed the trough further for congresscritters would have sailed in.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:12 PM (E4Afo)

285 Fantastic timing - the whole world just visited and realized our country is pretty damn good. Now they hear they can drop a baby and there's their ticket!

Posted by: 496 at June 30, 2026 01:13 PM (1OIAD)

286 A new amendment? Yeah that will work, never. Stick a fork in us, we're done as a country. Sorry, not voating our way out of this cluster, now. Had a good run of 250 years. Just getting by on inertia now, which will stop soon. We have maybe 10 years at best as the "USA".

Posted by: Ganowicz Commie Exterminators, Ltd. at June 30, 2026 01:13 PM (pZ64F)

287 That would be an absolute disaster. You would end up with no clear majority opinion - just a bunch of pluralities and dissents. In fact, you might end up with a bunch of affirmances of circuit court decisions because no majority can agree on a result.
Posted by: Dark Lixtiquatal

So is the birthright decision. We won't have a country much longer at this rate and the Muzzies have specifically targeted this country for conquest. Institutions like Scotus have abjectly failed as has Congress in abandoning their role to promote America rather than their multiple foreign interests and affections.

And that is because the ruling class in the West are anti nationalism, anti their existing populations, and anti borders. Last time such a combo ruled the West, we got WWI and the Napoleonic Wars which might as well have been called pre WWI.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:13 PM (E4rtv)

288 I would be greatly amused if Trump took a page from Jackson, noted the decision, and kept deporting the kids of illegals.

Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:13 PM (sKqQm)

289 I am going to call it the Longshanks Decision. They said the illegals are allowed to breed us out.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (Gringo fuertemente armado-Tempus belli) at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM (vra3d)

290 Twitter/X seems to be stuck

Posted by: Don Black at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM (ZxPkt)

291 The key to effective immigration policy, and to keep our status as a sovereign nation, has always been sane immigration law and effective border control. We failed utterly and miserably at that. For decades.

If you don't want your house crawling with rats, you stop them from getting in. You don't invite them in and then try to get rid of them. Immigration is exactly the same.

The reality is that under democrap presidents, we have invited in tens of millions of invaders and allowed them to stay pending their immigration cases. During that time, they were technically legally here.

If they had a baby, that baby would be a citizen -- even if we won the BRC case. Because nobody disputed that the children of foreigners legally here would be citizens.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM (iFTx/)

292 "There are remedies. Sorry for reposting a gazillion times, but obviously pregnant women entering on tourist visas have to open their wallets to Border Patrol to show that they have enough money to cover labor and delivery if they pop before their visa expires."

I wouldn't even let it get that far. Blood test for pregnancy before visa approval. If you are pregnant, you stay home until you pop your kid.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM (E4Afo)

293 Have only read a bit of the ridiculous and catastrophic ruling, but seems the key part. The complete fabrication of the import of the 14th, total disregard of its context and explicit purpose as clearly explained by those who wrote and passed it. Didn't realize they beclowned themselves with bizarre and comical excursions into British monarchical concepts.

The 250th is already hollow and unintentionally ironic for so many reasons, but this fresh and histrionic example of the lawlessness of the judiciary and the collapse of the system is like a skyrocket illuminating the scene.

Posted by: rhomboid at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM (U/Byj)

294 I’m amazed how little citizenship means to these jerks. They can’t even write their majority opinion to make sense.

As with everything that comes out of leftwing judges this has nothing to do with the law or Constitution. They had an outcome and the opinion they wrote is them torturing words to try and come up with an argument for their ruling

Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (sKqQm)

295 Apparently the Constitution IS a suicide pact.

Posted by: alanon at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (jHMkm)

296 When I'd read he was very good friends with Boasberg, that cinched it. Not that I didn't believe what I always knew him to be prior, but yeah, that sealed it. He's a disgrace. And he doesn't care.
Posted by: Lady in Black

He could be made to care. He is in the FISA intercepts as well so I wonder what shit he and Norm Eisen got up to in the Czech Republic all those years ago. That is how Roberts spent his summer vacay one year---"Norm Eisen, a former U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic and prominent anti-Trump legal strategist, revealed that Chief Justice John Roberts stayed for a week at his 150-room estate in the Czech Republic while Roberts was serving as Chief Justice. Eisen described Roberts as a "good friend" and stated they collaborated on "American and European rule of law issues,""

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (E4rtv)

297 And now, Your favorite President "

"Trump:

The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation, with the support of the President, that has now been determined during this process. No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!
President DONALD J. TRUMP"

As I was saying....

Posted by: runner at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (ugc0u)

298 God may be speaking to Ireland, will they listen? -

@TheBritishIntel
CONVENT AND ST PATRICK BURIAL SITE BURN DOWN IN DOWNPATRICK, MEDIA SAYS NOTHING

Yesterday the convent and the burial place of Saint Patrick himself in Downpatrick was reduced to ashes.

Locals say it was arson. The resting place of the patron saint of Ireland set on fire, and the legacy media has nothing to say. The politicians have nothing to say.

Posted by: Chuck Martel at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (Dv3i1)

299 270 More and more I wish Bush had elevated Thomas to the chief justiceship.
Posted by: tankdemon at June 30, 2026 01:10 PM (2RJDy)
Oh yeah, me too.

Posted by: Eromero at June 30, 2026 01:16 PM (LHPAg)

300 "There are remedies. Sorry for reposting a gazillion times, but obviously pregnant women entering on tourist visas have to open their wallets to Border Patrol to show that they have enough money to cover labor and delivery if they pop before their visa expires."

I wouldn't even let it get that far. Blood test for pregnancy before visa approval. If you are pregnant, you stay home until you pop your kid.
Posted by: cheshirecat

===

There's all sorts of remedies, but John Roberts ruled you're not allowed to even ask on the Census if someone is here legally?

How do you think things like pregnancy tests are going to go down legally?

Posted by: Sharpie at June 30, 2026 01:16 PM (kmOt8)

301 hey are globalists that float around across borders. Many of those Justices go abroad to Euroland to be feted and celebrated like Roberts. That is the problem in the West, the globalists literally float from nation to nation seeing only Potemkin reflections of problems created by anarchy caused by illegal and legal immigration.
==
They are bought and paid for. Their allegiance is not to us.
The United States of America stands in the way. And because it stands in the way, it must be destroyed.

It is altogether too powerful, rich and free. Its people are straightforward, industrious, largely content, and barring grievous provocation, peaceful. When roused, there is no force on earth that can contend against us when we are angry and united in purpose.

So, our destruction is to be carried out from within. By Quislings Frauds and Traitors

Posted by: All the idiots on the Supreme Court at June 30, 2026 01:16 PM (jvkDG)

302 Bet there's a whole lot of Springfield, OH Haitian women right now doing all they can to start premature labor and give birfs before they get sent home.

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 30, 2026 01:16 PM (qBdHI)

303 When I'd read he was very good friends with Boasberg, that cinched it. Not that I didn't believe what I always knew him to be prior, but yeah, that sealed it. He's a disgrace. And he doesn't care.
Posted by: Lady in Black at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM (qBdHI)

I did not know.. but why am I not surprised… at all?

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 30, 2026 01:17 PM (D2O3S)

304 Didn't realize they beclowned themselves with bizarre and comical excursions into British monarchical concepts.

The 250th is already hollow and unintentionally ironic for so many reasons, but this fresh and histrionic example of the lawlessness of the judiciary and the collapse of the system is like a skyrocket illuminating the scene.
Posted by: rhomboid

They misread British law as well. Sojourners was a thing. And as Enoch Powell explains to Dick Cavitt, not quite what Roberts and ACB along with the Howler Monkey triplets said,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVFh_CNePJc

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:17 PM (E4rtv)

305 Fantasy, I know. Trump should just come to the dais and say, "You know what, we don't deserve a 250th birthday party. The left is correct, being American is meaningless. The party is cancelled. Go fuck yourselves. HAVE A NICE DAY."

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:17 PM (E4Afo)

306 There's all sorts of remedies, but John Roberts ruled you're not allowed to even ask on the Census if someone is here legally?

How do you think things like pregnancy tests are going to go down legally?
Posted by: Sharpie

Not quite. That was Roberts being a shithead arguing that the APA was not followed as it every question on the survey followed the APA to get there. It was and is a discretionary action by the agency and not even reviewable under the legal regime at the time.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (E4rtv)

307 With ObamaCare and this decision, Roberts goes down as one of the destructive Justices of all time.

Clearly Alito and Roberts are in a battle to determine the equilibrium of the Court. Barrett has clearly chosen her side.

We got the Roe v. Wade reversal from Barrett, and now we pay a price for years to come. No more women on SCOTUS.

Posted by: alanon at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (jHMkm)

308 Wow. So much doom and gloom and end-of-the-world hysterics. Yes, we lost. Yes, The Blade is disappointed. Yes, the two RINOs on the Court fucked us yet again.

But ... so what? The immigration regime today is exactly the same as it was yesterday. Anchor babies and birth tourism babies were citizens yesterday. They are citizens today.

Nothing has changed -- nada -- other than some potential Congressional remedies that was never ever ever gonna happen anyway.

Everyone: Relax. Put out the fire in your hair. We live to fight another day.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (iFTx/)

309 The Five Horsemen judges never explained exactly what people are NOT "subject to the jurisdiction thereof", did they?

So they just ignored it, yes, but with no explanation at all, that I saw. Maybe they tried to cover it (like with a pillow) with the incorrect thing about British subjects. They just think we should be nicer, and not so racist and xenophobic, I suppose.

Posted by: illiniwek at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (vbXSk)

310 I found the news "racist thing" in a post by one Kiandria Demone...helping your kids by a house.

Someone posted that she recently found out some people help their kids come up with a down payment and Demone's response? Its racism. Because only white people do it.

Now...I suspect East Asians, Indians, etc all do it as well because most people do want to help their kids and if you have the resources to do so will but good to know this is yet another racist thing.
Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:11 PM

Oh, ffs...

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (kgE5c)

311 Boned. No change as current, but boned. Trains, planes, and automobiles make this a crisis. Immigrants sailing on old ships or even new ships made it tolerable.

Nevertheless, it calls for an administration to pregnancy test visitors to stop. Also must pass new laws against birth tourism (maybe there are already?), but CA and others won't enforce. The court always puts these extraordinary steps in play.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (n5tGW)

312 296 When I'd read he was very good friends with Boasberg, that cinched it. Not that I didn't believe what I always knew him to be prior, but yeah, that sealed it. He's a disgrace. And he doesn't care.
Posted by: Lady in Black

He could be made to care. He is in the FISA intercepts as well so I wonder what shit he and Norm Eisen got up to in the Czech Republic all those years ago. That is how Roberts spent his summer vacay one year---"Norm Eisen, a former U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic and prominent anti-Trump legal strategist, revealed that Chief Justice John Roberts stayed for a week at his 150-room estate in the Czech Republic while Roberts was serving as Chief Justice. Eisen described Roberts as a "good friend" and stated they collaborated on "American and European rule of law issues,""
Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (E4rtv)

You're only allowed power if they have leverage and dirt on you. It's like being a Scientologist. Or a Dionysian.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards, buy ammo at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (xcxpd)

313 290 Twitter/X seems to be stuck
Posted by: Don Black at June 30, 2026 01:14 PM
+++++++

Unplug it, count to ten and plug it back in.

Posted by: Tech Support at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (2Ez/1)

314 "The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified."

But of course, and they did it tout suite, I bet.
Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:02 PM (E4Afo)

Of course. Introduce a pay cut to $50k per year, plus staff expenses and franking, then build a few high-rise studio apartment blocks and make them live there during sessions. No need to buy expensive houses or have lavish parties. They can have a bar and meeting rooms in each building. Which will have 24 hour cam and sound surveillance.

Oh, and they have to wear livery too.

Posted by: OrangeEnt at June 30, 2026 01:20 PM (1Ff7Z)

315
Blood test for pregnancy before visa approval. If you are pregnant, you stay home until you pop your kid.
Posted by: cheshirecat

===========

I'm okay with that. And the test is done on embassy or consulate premises by a thick-boned nurse named Inga who does not understand humor.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:20 PM (XJ22o)

316 Would love to hear Rush Limbaugh's take on this. He never panicked and always brought reasonable arguments to his show. He said he'd tell us when it was time to panic and I don't think he'd say it's time yet

Posted by: 496 at June 30, 2026 01:20 PM (1OIAD)

317 297 And now, Your favorite President "

"Trump:

The Supreme Court upheld Birthright Citizenship, which is too bad for our Country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through Legislation, with the support of the President, that has now been determined during this process. No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!
President DONALD J. TRUMP"

As I was saying....
Posted by: runner
=======
Trump never gives up which is totally unlike every other GOP president of recent history--including Reagan.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:20 PM (E4rtv)

318 Effective immediately, I hereby order that all foreign females be barred entrance into the United States and all visas granted to females be cancelled, and all pending and future visa applications to females be denied.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Posted by: Donnie Two Scoops at June 30, 2026 01:20 PM (jvkDG)

319 Notre Dame College Republicans
@NDRepublicans

Barrett is an absolute disgrace to the Notre Dame name. We apologize on her behalf to all who will suffer the devastating consequences of infinity third-world migration.

Posted by: redridinghood at June 30, 2026 01:21 PM (NpAcC)

320 Enough with the ludicrous fantasies of barring pregnant foreigners from entry. That is, those you even have any control over (though the illegal flow has been - temporarily - reduced quite effectively). Would never happen, and would be "struck down" by a court in a picosecond if it did. On what basis? That's a funny sort of question when dealing with the wreckage of our constitutional system. No sensible or even non-insane basis required.

Posted by: rhomboid at June 30, 2026 01:21 PM (U/Byj)

321
Someday we're going to lose Thomas, and that will be a sad, sad day for our country.

Posted by: Frank Barone at June 30, 2026 01:21 PM (OkYzo)

322 316 Would love to hear Rush Limbaugh's take on this. He never panicked and always brought reasonable arguments to his show. He said he'd tell us when it was time to panic and I don't think he'd say it's time yet
Posted by: 496

It isn't but it is simply another bit of knowing that GOPe incorporated wants desperately to go back to before Trump existed. Doesn't change anything effectively but will encourage a political response of some kind. And that is unlikely to be favorable to this decision.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:21 PM (E4rtv)

323 As with everything that comes out of leftwing judges this has nothing to do with the law or Constitution. They had an outcome and the opinion they wrote is them torturing words to try and come up with an argument for their ruling
Posted by: 18-1 at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (sKqQm)

I have an affliction that I follow pro football. There’s a guy named Mike Florio that does something called Pro Football Talk (PFT). He’s a former lawyer… well still a lawyer but not active, his main job now is PFT.

Anyway Florio will often say that the NFL (Roger Goodell and the league office… Park Ave NYC) runs the league not based on law or published rules and logic. They determine what outcome they want and tell their lawyers: Construct an argument to get there.

Sounds like lefty SCOTUS justices…

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 30, 2026 01:22 PM (D2O3S)

324 Fantasy, I know. Trump should just come to the dais and say, "You know what, we don't deserve a 250th birthday party. The left is correct, being American is meaningless. The party is cancelled. Go fuck yourselves. HAVE A NICE DAY."

That's what the left has been calling for him to do. They're *big* mad about the fact that there's a big round anniversary and they aren't in charge and skimming the money spent on it for the DNC, which is part of what this idiotic algae thing is about.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:22 PM (QZThv)

325 Schlicter has an interesting perspective over on Townhall....

Posted by: Little Larry Sellers at June 30, 2026 01:22 PM (RIyP7)

326 NOOD - Rho Kanna is another rich "socialist".

Posted by: the lower depths at June 30, 2026 01:23 PM (b4kuR)

327 Trump never gives up which is totally unlike every other GOP president of recent history--including Reagan.
Posted by: whig

Correct! That's why I'm suspicious of the R's that are immediately jumping to the "we need an amendment" solution and skipping over many other easier to accomplish remedies and mediations.

Posted by: Chuck Martel at June 30, 2026 01:23 PM (Dv3i1)

328 Everyone: Relax. Put out the fire in your hair. We live to fight another day.

Posted by: Elric The Blade at June 30, 2026 01:19 PM (iFTx/)

There is no fire in my hair. I am flear eyed as can be.

There is room here to mourn what could have been. And to curse the fact that our "conservative" court chose to go beyond a punt and into their usual (when it suits them) construction of law.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:23 PM (KqZez)

329 AtC:

The courts will not save you. The courts should not save you.

Anyone who says differently is selling something.

Posted by: Ian S. at June 30, 2026 01:23 PM (QZThv)

330 Apparently the Constitution IS a suicide pact.
Posted by: alanon at June 30, 2026 01:15 PM (jHMkm)

Yes it's akin to a husband who respects his vows, but has a wife who keeps giving him the clap, and kids who look like a Benetton ad.

This isn't working for us. It hasn't for a long time.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (BI5O2)

331 "The courts will not save you. The courts should not save you."

True, but they shouldn't be holding the torch to the haystack in the barn, either.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (E4Afo)

332 What is Trump smoking? Anything resembling a fix getting through the Senate? Zero chance.

Besides - and whig can probably enlighten here - doesn't the "ruling" rule out any "fix"? They absurdly claim to believe the 14th answers the question. Legislation can't repeal an amendment. So any "fix" is ipso facto unconstitutional until the 14th is repealed.

Correct?

Posted by: rhomboid at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (U/Byj)

333 The courts will not save you. The courts should not save you.

Anyone who says differently is selling something.
==
Correction: anyone who says differently is probably a lawyer and billing by the hour.

Posted by: Donnie Two Scoops at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (jvkDG)

334
The key to effective immigration policy, and to keep our status as a sovereign nation, has always been sane immigration law and effective border control. We failed utterly and miserably at that. For decades.

Posted by: Elric The Blade

==============

So true. The deliberate inertia regarding remedies we actually had right at hand. What a way to run a country. But good news: it's changing, for now, and if we can sustain this change -- which should behave something like a juggernaut -- we can start acting like a sovereign nation again.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (XJ22o)

335 47 Fuck John Roberts -
Women shouldn't be on the Bench.
Posted by: garrett at June 30, 2026 12:23 PM (/ytnd)

Amen. We. Are Fucked.

As in, FUCKED.

Posted by: Bladerunner2019 at June 30, 2026 01:25 PM (hg9DX)

336 You're only allowed power if they have leverage and dirt on you. It's like being a Scientologist. Or a Dionysian.
Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards
=========
A) Roberts committed obstruction of justice in hindering the investigation into the leaking of the Dobbs decision.

B) Roberts is the supervising justice of the FISA court and its misuse for criminal purposes by his friend Boasberg and Democrats means that he himself has violated privacy rights under color of the law protected by US civil rights laws.

C) His wife is a top legal recruiter making millions by directing legal talent to the top law firms on commissions. Those top law firms routinely appear before the court as counsel and thus Roberts has a direct financial interest in pleasing those law firms.

D) The illegal adoption of his children--Ireland does not permit foreigners adopting Irish children (due to widespread problems of abuse). His skirting of those laws by arranging the Irish woman to go to Venezuela for birth and thence adoption of those Irish citizen kids is illegal.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:26 PM (E4rtv)

337 Trump knows how to not look like a loser. We will miss that when he goes. Bigly.

Posted by: ... at June 30, 2026 01:27 PM (KqZez)

338 can't repeal an amendment. So any "fix" is ipso facto unconstitutional until the 14th is repealed.

Correct?
==
Depends on the make up of the court. They could call that "dicta" which is not precedent and basically ignore it.
The problem with the Courts is, there are too many rationalizations that have been ginned up over the years to get the end result wanted in a particular case. And these rationalizations once utilized, can be trotted out again as a reason to do whatever is wanted by the majority. Basically, a life time supreme court of 9 can do whatever the fuck they want if they get a majority. Because there is always some way around it. Constitution be damned. It means what we want it to mean.

Posted by: Humpty MFing Dumpty at June 30, 2026 01:29 PM (jvkDG)

339 Besides - and whig can probably enlighten here - doesn't the "ruling" rule out any "fix"? They absurdly claim to believe the 14th answers the question. Legislation can't repeal an amendment. So any "fix" is ipso facto unconstitutional until the 14th is repealed.

Correct?
Posted by: rhomboid

Nope, technically Roberts and ACB were bloviating about the 14th. See Kavanaugh. It was the classic example of extraneous reasoning not needed to address the issues of the case. In this case, it was whether the President had the authority by executive order solely to reject administratively any claims by children born to foreigners who were not here legally or as tourists were not US citizens. Given previous rulings, that would seem to be so as Congress in previous decisions has been given almost plenary power over naturalization as it is a enumerated power. Contra Afroyim v. Rusk which is another 5-4 legally dubious Warren court relic on dual citizenship.

And Congress has several means to hurt Scotus--e.g. jurisdiction stripping (see Ex Parte McCardle and the Bricker Amendment in the 50's) on immigration, it can also expand the court which the Democrats are likely to do anyway.

Posted by: whig at June 30, 2026 01:32 PM (E4rtv)

340 Any word from Trump? He's been awfully silent on this so far.

Is that good, or is that bad?

By the way, what did Jackson babble in her decision?

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:35 PM (E4Afo)

341 Which is why I believe the President should be allowed to dismiss supreme court justices other Republican Presidents of have appointed in the past.

Posted by: stv at June 30, 2026 01:35 PM (ODbzh)

342 I'm halfway through reading Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspail, a deeply disturbing and haunting dystopic vision of invasion by the 3rd World. This decision just green-lighted the invasion. Thanks Amy Coney - you faithless bitch.

Posted by: Chairborne!...Desk From Above! at June 30, 2026 01:37 PM (KQmzo)

343 Oh, and fuck Rick Scott. He's trying to put Birthright clauses in the KIDS act. Bloody catch 22: turn down Digital ID, you turn down Birthright restrictions. Go piss up a rope.

Posted by: cheshirecat at June 30, 2026 01:38 PM (E4Afo)

344 thank God we have a conservative scotus.....just imagine if we..............????????

Posted by: uncouth jay marks at June 30, 2026 01:43 PM (uc/1V)

345 The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 30, 2026 01:01 PM (Cqx++)

the 27th Amendment was one of the original 12 Amendments offered as the Bill of Rights. Only 10 of those survived for ratification, up until this one was resurrected and ratified.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at June 30, 2026 01:45 PM (bufu1)

346 239 "The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was on May 7, 1992, when the 27th Amendment, concerning congressional pay, was ratified."

But of course, and they did it tout suite, I bet.

Actually, what became the 27th Amendment was originally one of the Amendments proposed for the Bill of Rights. There were 12 proposed back then, but only 10 of them survived ratification. This pay raise one had been lying dormant for 200 years before being ratified.

Posted by: LCMS Rulz! at June 30, 2026 01:48 PM (bufu1)

(Jump to top of page)

Name: *

Email: *

URL:

Comments:

Processing 0.06, elapsed 0.0646 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0157 seconds, 355 records returned.
Page size 221 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.