Decisions
We think of June (if we are normal human beings) as a time for graduations and weddings. There is another series of events associated with June. Typically, the Supreme Court renders some of its most important decisions in late June. With 19 cases still undecided a few are expected beginning at 10:AM EST today.
Most important IMHO is the decision concerning what the 14th Amendment really said. Was it about providing citizenship to the offspring of the newly freed slaves when the Amendment was written, or does it simply give citizenship to a birth taking place within the US by illegal migrants?
I have a hunch the Court may leave the disaster in effect. One day, hopefully sooner rather than later a super majority Republican congress will amend the 14th Amendment so that the birthright abuse will become meaningless.
The case of a President having the right to fire a Federal Reserve Governor is also to be decided. The case in question involves Lisa Cook ("first black woman to serve as a Fed Governor) who happens to be an ideologue. This case is on the docket because an activist federal court judge ruled that the President had no authority to fire her. Oddly enough that fact may undermine her chances of staying on the board. You see, the federal judge may be the one who overstepped his authority.
Another crucial issue is the President's decision to end prolonged & extended humanitarian protections for Haitian and Syrian migrants that have allowed hundreds of thousands of people to live and work legally in the United States. How can one president extend such protections, and another President can't end them?
There is also a case (Federal Trade Commission) which believe it or not questions the Chief executives right to fire federal employees. My hunch is that Trump wins that one 6-3.
There is also a challenge by the radical left to laws in West Virginia and Idaho that bar transgender women from playing on girls’ and women’s sports teams. I think that is an easy win for those states as well as common decency.
The Court may also settle a dispute over whether Mississippi can accept mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but received up to five days later.
There are also two Second Amendment questions in the mix.
Article is LOCKED by moderator [Split Personality]
Who is online
80 visitors
Common Justice Roberts ... Let's start getting it right .... for America!
What the fuck. I'm sorry, but this just drips with white nationalism and xenophobia. Why does that supposed ideal "American" family have to be all white? What the fuck is the problem with diversity in America? No one other than the stupid old, tired dumb fuck white supremacists and poorly educated xenophobes are worrying about the 14th amendment, it's just that simple. I used to feel sorry for the dipshits like many of my relatives in Arkansas who fear immigrants and are scared shitless of losing some fantasy 'white Ameria' ideal that has only ever existed in the deluded minds of self-absorbed, poorly read, mentally deficient conservative bigots. But it's pointless to give a fuck about what those useless sacks of shit think because their way of thinking will only sink America into reckless petty isolationism all to stroke the egos of white conservative Christo-fascists who care more about their religion than they do about our country or constitution.
It's sad that a family photo would upset anyone. Your commentary speaks volumes.
So much for the "inclusion" they claim they are all for.
We have to be gentlemen, right. Anyone can read the commentary.
The hypocrisy, racism and just plain ignorance is dripping from that.
It certainly is.
Is it? What made you pick that particular family and that particular photo? Why not a more modern photograph? Or an older one? There are so many families and so many eras and settings to choose from. Why pick one that reflects the ideal that so many modern white supremacists nostalgize as their ideal?
It's not just a family photo, you're presenting it as "right" or correct in some way, in a discussion about whether or not children born here of immigrants should or shouldn't be considered "American" as they have for the entirety of ALL of our lives. You don't have to try and hide it; the blatant xenophobia is written all over this seed.
Perhaps because I have read volumes instead of just sitting around admiring my white skin in the mirror and thinking about how superior being a white conservative Christian is and how superior English sounds and how stupid others are for switching to metric and if only everyone could be a white conservative Christian the world would be such a better place. /s
And can you get more dripping in racist subtext than "Let's start getting it right ..." and then that picture? I mean, you almost couldn't be more overt.
First of all it is my article, so I get to choose. I have no idea what these "white supremacists" you are worried about would choose, nor do I care. I picked what I thought was an average family complete with the dog.
Just out of curiosity what would you have chosen to represent an American family?
Maybe something from "All in the Family"?
How about an American family from the Japanese internment Camp Manzanar?
How about a typical Navaho family on the Reservations?
Slave families from the last century?
Share croppers from Appalachia?
Imagine the possibilities besides Ozzie & Harriet.
For many in the South & particularly Texas, the CIVIL WAR never ended, or, as they seem to think, that Southerners got the SHAF!
I lived in San Antonio and Houston, Texas, and the ribbons of WHITE HATE were, in many places in that state, still smoldering with revenge.
America is not a PERFECT country; it is a Democratic one. Unfortunately, Republicans in office, at nearly every level, switch from being responsible politicians to what they are today: CORRUPT GRIFTERS that do not give a damn about their constituents.
Getting rich from their political position is their primary goal.
My Mother was a Republican, my Father was a Democrat, so, naturally, I became an Independent, until that POS, "Dirty Diaper Donnie" came into the picture.
I switched to the Democratic Party. It appeared to me to be considerably less corrupt than the REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Our country is in serious trouble, not from outside forces, but from political corruption.
CHOOSE WISELY, MY FRIEND!
How bizarre, the kids have the same colour hair as the dog.
The important thing is to listen. Remember what America's iconic writer said about listening?
maybe the mrs got tired of strictly missionary ...
WOOF!
... is what mrs white bread was heard to exclaim by the neighbors when hubby was at work and the kids were in school.
Waiting on the poster of 4.1.12 to call this post a racist comment s/
The term white bread primarily refers to a light-colored, mass-produced bread made from wheat flour that has had the bran and germ removed through a milling process. Slang variations like "white-bread" describe something or someone that is conventional, unadventurous, or boring.
And the joke above is in reference to a woman who is seemingly conventional and boring being anything but when her husband and kids are away.
I am certain your response would be just as dismissive if someone referred to a black woman as "burnt toast", and gave a similar stupid reason. s/
It is well known that many leftists see life through a racist lens.
"joke above"
Is a racist joke about white women
I gave the answer Google gave which is what claimed that's what it meant. You can call it stupid, but that's what 'white bread' has meant for a very long time regardless of the fact that you were clueless about it.
I'm not at all concerned with what some lazy, useless bigots consider "well known". I'm sure they think God having a penis is "well known", does that make it true?
Here's a joke I heard back in elementary school:
"Hey, do you want to hear a dirty joke?"
"Sure."
"A white horse fell in the mud!"
So, was it a racist joke? It had the word "white" in it? No doubt whoever thought 'white bread" was racist will likely think white horse must be racist too! Of course they'd be wrong, but I'm sure that's something they run into frequently.
I did.
[deleted]
[✘] "Here's a joke I heard back in elementary school:
"Hey, do you want to hear a dirty joke?"
"Sure."
"A white horse fell in the mud!""
Funny, but had nothing to do with the race of a human.
Your argument has failed
And neither does the term 'white bread' but whatever. I really don't mind seeing bigots get a taste of their own racism thrown back in their fat fucking pasty faces, so believe it was racist if you want. Does that justify all the hate towards Obama from little turds not qualified to shine his shoes? Nope, but if it makes a weak whiny wittle bigots feel any better about themselves, then it was worth it, I guess. /s
meh, I probably should've called her mrs wonder bread, they likely would've taken that as a compliment ...
[deleted][✘]
Nice looking family Vic. Can they speak Farsi?
I'll try and speak for about 75% of the country and say, "thank you."
Khahesh mikonam
Let us in on it.
"Your welcome" in Farsi, as anyone who served in the ME would know.
I was about to include some comments directed to the great white dope in farsi, but then you showed up ...
Seems President Trump occupies the entire docket. That only heightens the perception that is this a government of, by, and for Trump.
And, yet, his followers are clueless where Trump Derangement Syndrome comes from?
yes. crazy progressives of the type who cause the whole docket to be filled up with trump cases, as you put it.
Perhaps. But as I recall the Trump administration pushed many of these cases onto the SCOTUS docket. After an early rush, Trump has been on the defensive much of the time. Now President Trump spends more time defending himself against Republicans.
When Trump supporters must defend Trump's morally reprehensible actions with the ultra-progressive excuse that morality is just an opinion, then what is common-Joe public supposed to believe?
What cases on the docket are morally reprehensible?
Yet those "crazy progressives" are winning a very high percentage of those cases.
Plaintiffs challenging the administration (such as Democratic state attorneys general, advocacy groups, and federal employee unions) win the majority of cases. The administration has lost around 60-70% of these preliminary rulings.
No they aren't. Per Google AI , The Trump administration wins about 70-75% of its cases before the Court..
[✘]
Trying to move the goalposts with a red herring?
Kinda like they bought into all of Trump's reasons for starting a fruitless war against Iran?
Now, now, the topic here is the pending Supreme Court decisions.
Fruitless? Interesting adjective selection.
Nearly 50 years of fomenting terror in the world. The can is so far down the road you can’t even see it anymore. Maybe next year is the year to do something about it, or next year or next year or next year ….. but Trump …….
Seems to be more on point than 'fruitful' n'est pas?
Opinions do vary. Many considered getting involved in WW-2 a fruitless endeavor for quite some time.
And even though we are not on the hook for the $300B for "rebuilding", there are those who fall on all kind of fainting couches thinking of that we are while forgetting what happened at the end of WWII. Who was it that aided in the reparations for Japan after the big one? Along with ally countries and their rebuilding efforts??
Was it about providing citizenship to the offspring of the newly freed slaves when the Amendment was written, or does it simply give citizenship to a birth taking place within the US by illegal migrants?
Unfortunately, they are going to misread it and ignore the fact that the Indian exclusion from citizenship under the 14th shows that birthright citizenship was never a thing. Those who owed loyalty to another nation at birth are not Americans under the 14th Amendment.
Doesn't that depend upon the arguments made by the Trump team?
The condition of dual citizenship does raise questions concerning jurisdiction. The interpretation of birthright citizenship is based upon territorial jurisdiction. But the US has argued that its jurisdiction is more expansive than territorial. The US claims jurisdiction to impose sanctions on individuals outside the US. The US claims jurisdiction to protect US citizens in foreign counties. So, obviously citizenship involves a more expansive jurisdiction than territorial.
The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 was enacted by Congress; not by interpretation of the 14th amendment. Birthright citizenship for children born to US citizens outside the territories of the US was also enacted by legislation rather than interpretation of the 14th amendment. So Congress does have some authority over naturalization.
IMO the question is the impact of jurisdiction on those individuals subject to deportation? Is someone present in the US that can be deported really covered by the 14th amendment? Does the 14th amendment establish a territorial jurisdiction or a legal jurisdiction? Congress would appear to have more authority over naturalization if the 14th amendment establishes a legal jurisdiction.
The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 was enacted by Congress; not by interpretation of the 14th amendment
That’s my point. If you believe in the current interpretation of the 14th amendment, Indians were already citizens and the act was pointless. But that wasn’t the case.
So Congress does have some authority over naturalization.
100%, unless there is a constitutional clause in contradiction, congress defines citizenship. So even if the court were to say “the 14th amendment doesn’t create birthright citizenship”, birthright citizenship would still exist until congress changes the statutory definition of citizenship to exclude birthright citizenship. All a court ruling would do is give congress a chance to act on the subject when if currently cannot as it is a constitutional issue instead of a legislative one,
I disagree with the 100% authority over citizenship. Congress does not have the authority to rescind citizenship of those born to US citizens. Some Republicans are attempting to rescind naturalized citizenship; however, children born while that citizenship was in force are US citizens, in my opinion. Of course, the counter argument would be that naturalized citizenship obtained fraudulently would nullify birthright citizenship. (I disagree that that counter argument.)
The issue of birthright citizenship was important before the 14th amendment was ratified. Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution states "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President..." To me that suggests that citizenship prior to the 1898 Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th amendment was subject to legal jurisdiction rather than territorial jurisdiction.
I wasn't arguing they do. Congress has the power to define citizenship within constitutional parameters.
children born while that citizenship was in force are US citizens, in my opinion.
Yes, changing that would be an ex post facto law, which they are constitutionally prohibited from passing. If the Court were to hold the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to foreigners born in the US and Congress then passes a new law implementing that distinction, than it would only apply to people born after the law's effective date. Foreigners born in America prior to that date that would remain US citizens.
'Happy' to see SCOTUS rule that Hunter Biden can own a gun. /s
The problem is that Hunter frequently leaves things behind. He left crack at the WH and left his laptop at the shop. That caused the FBI under his brain dead father to censor the news and Blinken to recruit about 50 or so former Intel officials to lie about it.
That's a rumour. What's not a rumour is your present 'leader' housing a multitude of crackpots in the WH. What the heck, eh? What with Hunter getting a gun Iran gets whatever weapons it wants ... and a boatload of cash that would sink the USN Obama ... winning!
So was Capone arranging the St Valentines Day Massacre. /S
What's not a rumour is your present 'leader' housing a multitude of crackpots in the WH. What the heck, eh? What with Hunter getting a gun Iran gets whatever weapons it wants ... and a boatload of cash that would sink the USN Obama ... winning!
We expect more of you. We can discuss the "Iran deal" when it becomes a signed deal. Not really the topic here.
Ah yes, birthright citizenship, the reason all those pregnant Natashas came to the US and rented sprawling spaces in Trump's hotels.
It is lesson time:
"Leticia Alvarez didn’t realize she was pregnant when she left Venezuela, determined like millions of other asylum-seekers to trade the political persecution and hardships for new opportunities elsewhere.
Alvarez learned she was 13 weeks pregnant in Panama after she developed intense belly pain early in her family’s trek to the Mexico-U.S. border. The news pushed the 25-year-old into a population of migrant women who navigate the already stressful process of giving birth while also seeking asylum in a new country.
In 2021, President Joe Biden reversed a Trump-era policy that allowed pregnant women or nursing mothers to be detained by border officials. Despite the change, the American Civil Liberties Union submitted a petition with more than 900 signatures that called for U.S. Customs and Border Protection to change its policy to minimize harm to women who are pregnant, postpartum, or nursing, saying that mothers-to-be continue to be mistreated."
Pregnant migrants balance journey to childbirth, asylum
Enter America illegally, get to a hospital and give birth, instant citizenship!
Class dismissed.
900 signatures? Sounds like a majority to me.
That's how the Civil Liberties Union works. They only make a case before a friendly judge or court or as in this case, a very friendly administration. Imagine letting pregnant migrants in?
Hunter would never leave his crack anywhere.
Leticia's mistake was not taking out Russian citizenship first.
As Columbo would say he was the only one with a motive and oppurtunity.
That would probably get her throat cut on a train. And 4 black passengers would then step over her body while exiting the train.
Yep, don’t bother with Canada after bill C-12. That much is clear
Racist comment.
No, it is a factual comment. Facts are not racist.
"New video footage reveals no passengers intervened as Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska was brutally stabbed on a commuter train in Charlotte, North Carolina. The 30-year-old war survivor died while bystanders stood by or walked past, prompting national outrage and renewed criticism of lenient criminal justice policies."
New footage shows bystanders ignoring Iryna Zarutska as she was fatally stabbed on Charlotte train
Explain the motive for me. Did he have too much?
It's racist speculation.
That doesn't work anymore. The entire country is fed up with being called "racist", DEI, double standards and critical legal theory.
I have you facts and you have no answer
No, a third of the country is tired of being called racist but apparently those confederate flag flying Nazi loving rightwing conservatives aren't tired of being racist which is why they're so intent on overturning the 14th amendment. And can we really even consider that third of fuckwad bigots "Americans"? They're not loyal to the constitution and the country, they're only loyal to their race, their religion and their orange faced lying sack of shit Fuhrer.
june is a sad month for republicans. the slaves were freed and trump surrendered to iran ...
Did you forget that is EXACTLY what happened in Charlotte, NC? Since when did facts become racist? Oh wait...
... I think mostly just the maga racists.
Let me teach. After 60 years of affirmative action, DEI, racial obsession, especially here in the US as well as the rest of the western world, people have had their fill. They have begun to reason that such tribalism leads to what happened in Rwanda and the Balkans. We have reached the breaking point. We saw the attempted beheading of an innocent man by an immigrant from Somalia in Belfast, we saw Henry Nowalk bleed to death in handcuffs because British police preferred to believe a lie by a Sikh immigrant who stabbed him with a sword that only Sikhs were allowed to carry and as I noted above, we had the case of Iryna Zarutska who had her throat cut on a train while passengers watched and quietly walked off the train. All of those were hate crimes.
In addition to all of this or maybe it was the pretext, we have had white people used as the foil, much like you have done in every post. Many democrat politicians talk constantly about white people in negative terms. Most notable would be a true racist - Jasmine Crockett. If you have paid attention to social media lately or watched reactions during the trial, you may have noticed that Karmelo Anthony has become a kind of folk hero to some black Americans.
In addition is the hatred of all that is white in the universities. The Constitution forbids DEI and despite the federal government taking them to court, they are still trying to get around it. The left divided the nation along racial lines. The people are on to it now. As I said before, your comments speak volumes.
I tried my best to explain it. I'm not like a professor. I don't get tenure after 6 years with a guaranteed income for life. I'm just trying to reason with you.
Then why are people, Black and white, still trapped by a "legacy of slavery"?
trump and maga have pretty much demonstrated that the US constitution doesn't mean a fucking thing to them ...
probably because there weren't enough dead confederates 160 years ago ...
Gee, that sounds inflammatory
That could be considered inflammatory
I feel that's a bit inflammatory
All those Confederates and freed slaves are dead now but slavery remains as an inheritance for descendants of both.
Today's politics perpetuates slavery. So, has slavery really ended? Progressives spend a lot of time and effort to revive slavery as a national inheritance of guilt rather than a celebration of progress.
As Afroman so eloquently put it he got high!
more like historical ...
your comment is repeating nonsense, like your hero ...
it took alleged religious conservatives a century to be forced to come to terms with equality ...
... and most still can't accept it.
Bull, they just object to the sophomoric attempts of this Administration to rewrite that history
Like removing, reinstalling then removing the slavery exhibit at Washington's Presidential home in Philadelphia. The attempted vandalism of the original displays was foiled when different schools reproduced the panels from photographs and reinstalled them themselves.
When the Park Service attempted to remove the temporary panels, everyone visiting the Mall that day formed a shield around Washington's home regardless of age, color and political persuasion. The courts eventually ordered all of the originals replaced or repaired and reinstalled.
If you saw the Obama interview this week he challenged people to not pretend that it did not happen and not to be embarrassed by our collective past,
be happy that we survived, grew and learned from our past.
Are you talking about cultural racial issues
or gender equality? They seem to have issues with both.
Oh, but if you were actually able to.
What you prove it that you view the very large, very complex world still torn apart by religious conflict everyday on a world scale,
through a straw and make it personal.
How do people who have never been to college or university seem to know all it's problems?
That much is obvious.
probably not a passing grade.
at least their religious hypocrisy has been consistent over the decades ...
define progress ...
"WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court unanimously rejected the prosecution of a Texas man for purchasing a firearm while consuming marijuana Thursday, weakening a federal law used to convict former first son Hunter Biden.
In a unanimous ruling written by Republican-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch, the high court agreed that the prosecution of Ali Danial Hemani violated his Second Amendment rights.
The court did not address the question of whether addicts who were currently intoxicated could purchase a firearm or whether any person under the influence of marijuana could be deemed too dangerous to possess a gun."
Supreme Court weakens law used to convict Hunter Biden on gun charges
Any clue as to why the NY Post included a pic of naked Biden holding a pistol? Is Hunter now page 5 material?
But hey, what with even the NY Post now trashing Trump et al, I guess MAGA-'rationality' is not only leaving the building but the nation also.
I'm so glad that you checked into to it. That's what I mean about listening. I think the idea was to show a genuine crack head and the specter of him having a gun.
Is Hunter now page 5 material?
He was front page news when he left his laptop at the shop. Unfortunately, the FBI censored the story so fucked-up Biden could win an election.
But hey, what with even the NY Post now trashing Trump et al, I guess MAGA-'rationality' is not only leaving the building but the nation also.
Just remember, no matter how bad it looks for MAGA, it always looks worse when people take a look at the democrats.
Indeed, MAGA does look worse when looking at democrats and even they (MAGA) are starting to catch on that the 'rave' is over and the Trump Juice is corked ... Call the Greek Sommelier!
It is supposed to be a "blue wave" in November. Do you think so?
A blue tsunami might be a better prediction were I to make one. I sense the american electorate is at longlast comming to the conclusion it is Trump himself who embodies manifest-TDS.
It will be more than a blue wave; conservatives will get hit so hard they won't know which way is up. The failed policies of rightwing conservatism have already been exposed. The corpse of the Republican party after Trump fooled it, stabbed it in the back and then fucked it, is already rotting in the hall. And this Iran MoU and subsequent claim of a "done deal" won't last. I wish it would, honestly, that would be great if gas prices actually came back down to pre-war levels, but it's not going to happen. We might see a few short-term drops that Republicans will be doing everything they can to make happen before the midterms, but it won't last. It never does with proven liars like Trump and the Trumpublican party. I hope conservatives have developed a taste for crow, because they're going to be eating a lot of it over the next two years.
My grandchildren were born in America to my Canadian son and his American wife, Since then my son (who lives with his family in America and works there) has obtained dual citizenship. Are my grandchildren at risk of being deported, and if so, to where?
[✘]
removed for context