This is the CEO of the Federalist
https://nitter.net/seanmdav/status/2071983931998494799#m
Several ways forward here given the choice of Roberts/Barrett to nullify the 14th Amendment and extra-constitutionally replace it with their own language:
- Nullification. States issue birth certificates, and they can just stop issuing them to non-citizens. Roberts/Barrett can deal with the fallout and litigate each birth individually.
- Pack the court. If Robert wants to be a politician who writes laws instead of a judge, then he can fight with 10 more unelected legislators in robes.
- Deny entry to all pregnant foreigners.
- Deny entry to all female foreigners.
- Require sterilization of all foreign visitors prior to entry.
- Dissolution of the Union. A nation which can’t even restrict who gets to be a citizen isn’t a nation.
- Amend the Constitution. This is pointless, because once a judge decides he can rewrite the Constitution at will (as Roberts and Barrett did today), the actual text is meaningless. But this is what most GOP politicians gravitate towards because they are useless.
If you think all these options are not great, understand that that is what happens when unelected judges decide that they are in charge of the country and get to write its laws.
- Require sterilization of all foreign visitors prior to entry.
I see fascists are comfortable openly talking like this again
Positions that should get you beaten and thrown down a well
I read it as highlighting just how ridiculous it sounds to do something like what just happened. Did I read it wrong? Am I giving the author too much credit?
Honestly I’m not 100% sure but everyone else in the thread seems sure this post is by a chud, but I could be making some incorrect assumptions about this person.
Edit: looking at stuff this person retweeted, no he’s absolutely a chud
OH MY FUCKING GOD OH MY FUCKING GOD
I’ve been out of the loop on America. The Supreme Court rejected Trump saying that birthright is gone.
The way this was phrased and the way these things go I thought there was a constitutional crisis because the supreme court agreed with him!
This guy is a fucking bastard!! This is ridiculous
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.
That’s as cut and dry as it gets. No wishy washy question of what constitutes “the press” or what is meant by “well-regulated.” You born in the US, you’re a citizen. This dude is smoking pure copium if he thinks there’s some exception to be found there.
4 out of 9 Supreme Court justices disagree with you!
Also let’s say they were right. How far back does it change? Do people who came over in 1832 and had kids here who have now lived here 200 years get deported? I’m guessing no if they’re white.
Edit: But honestly maybe it’s a feature to them? They could do the Nazi thing where they examine anyone they don’t likes ancestry to justify sending them to a camp.
It’s always just racism. They would deport anyone who isn’t white, instead of whites who can’t prove they’re Native American. They don’t care about hypocrisy.
Yes, you see, but there was a similar statute that was passed before the 14th amendment that said “not subject to any foreign power” and even though they did not use those words and instead used the words “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” they definitely meant for them to be interpreted as identical which is to say that you have to be “domiciled” in the US even though that word appears nowhere in either text. [this is actually what the Thomas dissent says and only he has the magic ball to know what those guys were thinking back then!]
Yeah that’s the problem with “originalism”, it presents itself as sticking strictly to the source, but in practice it ends up being a narrow cherry picking of what was written about the text at the time that just happens to align with the originalist’s views.
Just straight up double-speak (like everything else). Pretend they are rigidly sticking to what it has always been without reference to the world we all live in while actually being the most elastic interpretive doctrine that fits whatever fucked up conclusion they want to reach. And I didn’t read it in detail but I don’t know if he ever even pretends to reconcile why they used different words while meaning the same thing even though the two version were adopted by congress within a year or two of each other.
Dissolution of the Union. A nation which can’t even restrict who gets to be a citizen isn’t a nation.
LITERALLY. Like don’t threaten me with a good time!
Won’t even work, immediate civil war.
I will settle for that too
So how does it work, do states appropriate the federal military bases in their borders as their own standing army in conjunction with their national guard?
Sure makes for an interesting conflict map.
That happens initially but within a week some states have formed a group. Then over the coming weeks/months other states realise they will get completely rolled over by this group so they either join it or form their own group. These groups then fight over their disagreements and either consolidate back into one union again or into a few smaller countries.
Also a lot of war crimes, ethnic cleansing and ideological cleansing, communists in particular will be at very high risk.
Hawaii probably gets complete independence. No idea what to make of Alaska, might join Canada? I doubt Canada stays out of the whole situation either.
once a judge decides he can rewrite the Constitution at will (as Roberts and Barrett did today
Rewriting the constitution is when you go “oh yea it says what it plainly says, guess we’ll just keep doing that like we’ve done for 250 years”
It is ironic that it is impossible to adequately reply to the federalist without fed posting.
You call yourself a “Federalist”, yet you reject the 200+ years of precedents started by Marbury v. Madison. Curious.
burn this man alive
It’s amazing cause SCOTUS gave them everything else, I know it’s not the point but it’s always amazing to watch fascists break down like spoiled assholes when shit like this happens. It doesn’t even matter cause America is scaring everyone away at this point. (though it should of happen sooner)
Do some of the things he said here worry you? Cool. The US Constitution was brought up so just want to remind everyone in the US that the 2nd amendment exists. Keep something around just in case you need to defend yourselves from a white supremacist terrorist who breaks into your house.
if you don’t like the justices then why did you ask for them
I don’t understand how it would work if you didn’t have birthright citizenship? What would happen if you’re born here but not a citizen? Wouldn’t you have no citizenship and therefore no legal right to exist anywhere?
God forbid we dissolve these stupid borders and just live our lives…
Many European countries have some sort of humiliating song and dance where your parents have to submit a request for a residency permit at birth, and then it has to be renewed with a certain cadence. Some countries will grant you citizenship if you manage to graduate high school or prove that you’re “integrated” enough. In the meantime? You’re a foreign resident with diminished rights and sometimes blocked from accessing certain services because they’re restricted to citizens.
It’s fash shit, but there are ways to do it.
is off the charts here.Not going to look right now but I have to wonder if the dissenting justices here published their dissents.
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.
Because while I know bullshitting and reading into things is a lawyer/judge specialty but there seems absolutely no way around something written this clearly and explicitly other than A) declaring non-whites aren’t persons which isn’t practical or feasible, B) some hilarious invention about birth not being finished until 1 month after or something so they should have time to deport newborns and deny them citizenship, C) some ridiculous notion immigrants, visitors, etc are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (oh cool so they can just do capital crimes and your only option is to deport them? yeah right, especially in a country that kidnaps foreign leaders off their foreign soil because they decided US jurisdiction applies to them) or D) straight up declaring judges can alter the constitution (and all other laws) by fiat based on just feeling the law no longer serves some vague interest. This last one in particular seems to be a common sentiment among the tantrum reactionaries but only when they don’t get their way, otherwise they’re constitution humpers who sob and jerk off to “the framers” in their American civic religion.
That Sartre quote about fascists knowing they are absurd but words only having meaning to their enemies is quite applicable.
The Thomas dissent is like double the length of the majority opinion. The alito dissent is written like a polemic instead of a judicial opinion (but is short at least).
Option 6 please
No idea what the federalist is but this guy sucks so much
Think the daily wire or the blaze but less interesting.
