• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

SCOTUS has upheld birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, holding that children born in the U.S. to parents without legal status are ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and therefore are citizens. Trump’s executive order that attempted to override this part of the Constitution is struck down.


We’ve definitely and reassuringly seen SCOTUS show its willingness to stand up to illegal policy from administration over the past couple days.

I suspect there’s going to be a lot of political anger over this one, but it’s legally correct.
 
Last edited:
QV said:
How nice, a win for birth tourism.
Click to expand...
How nice. The constitution being respected rather than treated as an inconvenience by a corrupt grifter and his merry band of Jolly Ollies who are asset stripping a once great nation
 
PPCLI Guy said:
How nice. The constitution being respected rather than treated as an inconvenience by a corrupt grifter and his merry band of Jolly Ollies who are asset stripping a once great nation
Click to expand...

It was a 5-4 decision. Not a unanimous slap down.
 
QV said:
It was a 5-4 decision. Not a unanimous slap down.
Click to expand...
Still a slap down.

If you don’t like the constitution there is a process to amend it (hence all the amendments). Trump sought to circumvent it and the established norms of over a century. Good on the judiciary for standing up for what is right.
 
QV said:
It was a 5-4 decision. Not a unanimous slap down.
Click to expand...
It was 6-3, actually, and at the last and final level. Java sigh was partial concurrence partial dissent, but joined the majority in striking the executive order albeit on different grounds.

Trump tried to stomp on the constitution and lost to a court that has largely been deferential to him. In this case the message is clear; if he wants to achieve this policy objective he can do it properly and advocate for Congress and the state legislatures to amend the Constitution. That’s how separation of powers works.

The 14th Amendment, incidentally, is the same post-civil war amendment that brought the due process clause. Seeing the courts protect it is important.
 
QV said:
It was a 5-4 decision. Not a unanimous slap down.
Click to expand...
so you only really win any competition if you blank the opponent? A win is a win. And a loss is a loss. This was a big loss.

The key now is whether he is able to pass the SAVE act, because if he does the US system of government will change dramatically, and not for the better.
 
PPCLI Guy said:
so you only really win any competition if you blank the opponent? A win is a win. And a loss is a loss. This was a big loss.

The key now is whether he is able to pass the SAVE act, because if he does the US system of government will change dramatically, and not for the better.
Click to expand...
I’m still scratching my head at the Republicans’ histrionics about how counting ballots postmarked no later than election day somehow threatens election integrity over only counting those that arrive by election day. A postal ballot is a postal ballot. Argue issues with that, sure, but the fixation on that date is weird.

They should really send a team up here to study how we do our elections and maybe learn from it.
 
brihard said:
I’m still scratching my head at the Republicans’ histrionics about how counting ballots postmarked no later than election day somehow threatens election integrity over only counting those that arrive by election day. A postal ballot is a postal ballot. Argue issues with that, sure, but the fixation on that date is weird.

They should really send a team up here to study how we do our elections and maybe learn from it.
Click to expand...
Democracy rises and sets on them, they will never come to us (or anyone) to learn anything on our processes or procedures.
 
brihard said:
I’m still scratching my head at the Republicans’ histrionics about how counting ballots postmarked no later than election day somehow threatens election integrity over only counting those that arrive by election day. A postal ballot is a postal ballot. Argue issues with that, sure, but the fixation on that date is weird.

They should really send a team up here to study how we do our elections and maybe learn from it.
Click to expand...
Elections Canada is one of our greatest unsung institutions and noone can convince otherwise. Non-partisan districting is a real boon and the whole concept of political gerrymandering like you see in the American system is disgusting.
 
brihard said:
I’m still scratching my head at the Republicans’ histrionics about how counting ballots postmarked no later than election day somehow threatens election integrity over only counting those that arrive by election day. A postal ballot is a postal ballot. Argue issues with that, sure, but the fixation on that date is weird.

They should really send a team up here to study how we do our elections and maybe learn from it.
Click to expand...
And also find out that you can have more than 2 political parties or "GASP" their representatives in congress can be independants!
 
PPCLI Guy said:
so you only really win any competition if you blank the opponent? A win is a win. And a loss is a loss. This was a big loss.

The key now is whether he is able to pass the SAVE act, because if he does the US system of government will change dramatically, and not for the better.
Click to expand...

Their current and probably not the best idea for that. Hold the NDAA hostage.

Johnson-backed plan to combine Pentagon and election bills advances to floor​


Because the Senate will absolutely pour cold water on in.

The Senate is set to debate its own version of the defense bill next month, and it is likely that the elections overhaul will be removed in negotiations between the two chambers — as McGovern acknowledged Monday and House GOP leaders privately concede.

“The Senate will just strip the SAVE Act out,” he said at the meeting. “There is a zero percent chance SAVE ends up in the [Pentagon bill] because of this rule today.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top