Appeals Court Refuses To Lift Block On Trumps Restricting Birthright Citizenship

[DBA]

It hasn’t been up for debate for over 150 years

Um, no. Do some research.

 

[pknopp]

That is the plan. The Supreme Court can re-evaluate the 14th and interpret, taking into account the intent of the framers and what was going on in the US at that time.

Seems like we are in agreement.

Nope.

 

[DBA]

Nope.

They will hear the case, as they should. You will see.

 

[pknopp]

They will hear the case, as they should. You will see.

Sure they will. I disagree they will reinterpretate it.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

They added the 14th Amendment to address a problem that the framers of our Constitution did not foresee being an issue ~80 years earlier. We now need to modify or interpret the 14th Amendment to do exactly the same thing. Like their forefathers, the framers of the 14th couldn’t see 150 years into the future.

No, there is no need. But if there is, the Amendment process is the way.

 

[DBA]

No, there is no need. But if there is, the Amendment process is the way.

Nope, times in circumstances have changed that require a renterpretation. Clearly they recognized that there should be exceptions to birthright citizenship. It's long past time to reevaluate those exceptions.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Nope, times in circumstances have changed that require a renterpretation. Clearly they recognized that there should be exceptions to birthright citizenship. It's long past time to reevaluate those exceptions.

Maybe 140 of you do. Over 300 million do not.

Appeals court denies Trump’s plea to reinstate birthright citizenship ban

 

[DBA]

Sure they will. I disagree they will reinterpretate it.

I don't know how they will rule. All I said was that if intent does come into play in the decision, Democrats won't be happy with the outcome.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I don't know how they will rule. All I said was that if intent does come into play in the decision, Democrats won't be happy with the outcome.

The intent is clear that all babies, excepting those of foreign diplomats, are citizens.

Meaning does not change because your intent is that it should change.

 

[pknopp]

I don't know how they will rule. All I said was that if intent does come into play in the decision, Democrats won't be happy with the outcome.

Its funny how people want courts to rule on words that don't exist when it suits their purpose but not when it doesnt.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

235 years is some status quo

Passing This Elitist Manifesto Is What Put the Crack in the Liberty Bell

The French aristocratic reign of terror lasted for a thousand years. Tyrannies tend to grow stronger as time goes by; endurance is no sign of justice, but of the Deep State's "Just Us."

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Being under a jurisdiction is like being under a thumb. It’s not a free wheeling license to do as you please

If You've Heard of Someone, Don't Listen to Him

Reject the intentionally ineffective memes given by the self-appointed fake-Right Influencers. Getting a legal right through illegal means refutes birthright citizenship absolutely. The fact that none of these huffy-puffy blowhards ever point out SCROTUS's contradiction in logic proves they don't want us to think, except that they do want us to think they're smarter than us and that we should just parrot them from our Netrix cages.

Even a Supreme Being can't create a logical contradiction, such as a square circle, but the megalomaniac washed-up lawyers in the Supreme Court have given themselves the right to do so.

Let Trump refuse to recognize Judicial Review. No one worth paying attention to will protest, so that defiance of a black-robed dictatorship will become his policy from then on.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

They added the 14th Amendment to address a problem that the framers of our Constitution did not foresee being an issue ~80 years earlier. Like their forefathers, the framers of the 14th couldn’t see 150 years into the future.

The Blind Leading the Ones They Blinded

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

They were perfectly clear

As Clear as Mud, About Their Partiality Towards the Mud Races

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The ninth circus? go figure

Appropriate Name for an Institution of Clowns Flaunting Gavels and Gowns

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Nope, times in circumstances have changed that require a renterpretation. Clearly they recognized that there should be exceptions to birthright citizenship. It's long past time to reevaluate those exceptions.

Bury Marbury

Why should we trust them? These nerdy word-jugglers have had a long history of going against their own original intent about how they'd rule, as expressed in their nomination hearings. The only thing these pompous potentates have ever listened to is serious threats about taking away the totalitarian dictatorship of Judicial Review.

 

[d0gbreath]

One does not EO amend the US Constitution.

 

[DBA]

Its funny how people want courts to rule on words that don't exist when it suits their purpose but not when it doesnt.

Do you mean like Roe v Wade?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Do you mean like Roe v Wade?

a good example of a fallacy of false equivalency

 

[pknopp]

Do you mean like Roe v Wade?

Sure. Was it wrong then but would be OK now?