They will push the limits, personalize the attacks, scream that Trump is indeed being Hitler, and so on in a depressingly nauseating tirade of legal abuses and flimsy lawfare meant chiefly to continue the false narrative…
They will push the limits, personalize the attacks, scream that Trump is indeed being Hitler, and so on in a depressingly nauseating tirade of legal abuses and flimsy lawfare meant chiefly to continue the false narrative they’ve been propagating for years.
But you are correct, ultimately the lawfare will be resolved by the actual legal-system processes. I love America!
Ultimately, it will come down to the Supreme Court issuing a ruling on the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction."
Interestingly, where I think the "experts"--who, let's be clear, are working backwards from their preferred legal outcome of birthright citizenship for all to assemble their legal logic--miss the mark is in the particular wording of the 14th Amendment.
Citizenship is predicated on being "subject to the jurisdiction", but the equal protection of the laws is predicated on being "within the jurisdiction"
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The text of the Amendment says that people within the United States enjoy the equal protection of the laws--and that includes citizens and non-citizens alike.
"within" is a preposition indicating enclosure or containment.
These are not synonymous and we should not use them synonymously.
Accordingly, we have to impute different meanings and intentions to the sentence regarding citizenship and the sentence regarding equal protection of the laws. By so doing, we are immediately confronted with a rejection of birthright citizenship for all.
It will degenerate into lawfare. For example, look at this headline from today’s MN Statribune:
https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-ag-joins-21-other-states-in-legal-action-to-block-trump-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/601209002?utm_source=gift
They will push the limits, personalize the attacks, scream that Trump is indeed being Hitler, and so on in a depressingly nauseating tirade of legal abuses and flimsy lawfare meant chiefly to continue the false narrative they’ve been propagating for years.
But you are correct, ultimately the lawfare will be resolved by the actual legal-system processes. I love America!
Ultimately, it will come down to the Supreme Court issuing a ruling on the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction."
Interestingly, where I think the "experts"--who, let's be clear, are working backwards from their preferred legal outcome of birthright citizenship for all to assemble their legal logic--miss the mark is in the particular wording of the 14th Amendment.
Citizenship is predicated on being "subject to the jurisdiction", but the equal protection of the laws is predicated on being "within the jurisdiction"
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The text of the Amendment says that people within the United States enjoy the equal protection of the laws--and that includes citizens and non-citizens alike.
"within" is a preposition indicating enclosure or containment.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/within
"subject" however, is an adjective and indicates owing obedience or allegiance.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subject
These are not synonymous and we should not use them synonymously.
Accordingly, we have to impute different meanings and intentions to the sentence regarding citizenship and the sentence regarding equal protection of the laws. By so doing, we are immediately confronted with a rejection of birthright citizenship for all.
I so thoroughly wish you could be on the Supreme Court, Peter. Your clarity of reasoning is astoundingly perfect! I bow to your beautiful mind.