@disrespectcrow @adamscochran All this shows is you dont understand the meaning of allegiance in English common law.
English
ExistentialLab
2.1K posts
@adamscochran She equated jurisdiction to allegiance while immediately thinking about theft when opining citizenship. That's a level of incompetence or deliberate bias that should be disqualifying for any justice, regardless of appearance.
English
Lmfao sit the fuck down.
She went to Harvard and served as a circuit judge.
You went to Chapman University and are an ambulance chasing personal injury firm.
I don’t think KBJ is an exceptionally strong Justice but she is qualified and is 10,000x more capable than you.
You did not know peers like her in your class, because people that capable didn’t go to Chapman.
The sheer audacity! Lol! 😂😂
Sam Mirejovsky@whatsrightsam
I went to law school People like KBJ are insufferable in class, they’re insufferable in practice, and they’re DANGEROUS on the bench High ideology Low IQ
English
@catchrindeoats @MelissaB63137 @TheLaurenChen They were not subject to US laws because the US had treaties with the Indian governments.
English
@MelissaB63137 @TheLaurenChen Damn....You're as dumb as she is.
Uhh....Native Americans were subject to American laws but were never granted citizenship because they belonged to a different nation--tribe. Their tribe was their allegiance---not the USA.
Chew on that one.
English
To be clear, the Japanese don't give criminals citizenship
They deport them
Because they're not idiots or insane
End Wokeness@EndWokeness
Justice KBJ: "If I steal a wallet in Japan, I am subject to Japanese laws….. in a sense, it's allegiance." Her case for birthright citizenship:
English
@MsplacedBeachBm @data_republican Thats the way its used in English common law. Most of the RW accounts on here are too ignorant to know this though.
English
@data_republican She was trying to say jurisdiction is equal to allegiance. It’s not and the argument, like everything else that comes out of her mouth, was stupid.
English
Can someone please explain what going to Japan and stealing someone's wallet has to do with birthright citizenship? I don't get it.
English
@data_republican KBJ used the English common law concept of juridiction/allegiance meaning you are subject to the laws of that nation. She used to example of someone stealing a wallet in Japan being subject to their laws. Some RW accounts took her out of context to suggest it was absurd.
English
@furiouswhopper @harryfaery @srob_ Yeah , he said every other class of person except for children of foreigners diplomats. Its pretty clear what he mean. If he meant to say illegal immigrants are another exception, he would have said that, but he didnt.
English
@harryfaery @srob_ It's right there, I can read. Are you claiming that this isn't a list but a wildly fragmented description of foreign diplomats only?
English
Genuinely wild to include this passage and claim it supports your views!
Christian Heiens 🏛@ChristianHeiens
How fucking retarded do you have to be to believe that the original intent of the 14th amendment’s authors was for citizenship to be automatically granted to the children of tourists, illegals, and even enemy combatants who are being held on American soil? The man who wrote the amendment quite literally went on the Senate floor and publicly declared that it wouldn’t apply to foreigners or aliens.
English
@ChristianHeiens If the Amendment is really that important you should think of some kind of trade with Dems. Maybe trade the electoral college or Citizens United or DC statehood or some Amendment dems want for an Amendment you want.
English
Don't play coy with us. There is no possibility short of armed conflict for such an amendment to ever be passed.
Even if we fell on our hands and knees and begged Democrats to support this amendment for the sake of the nation that we both call home, they would still say "No" because they understand that demographic replacement and mass migration are indispensable tools for acquiring political power.
They will never give these things up, even if refusing to do so eventually results in the destruction of the very country they seek to rule over.
Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D.@neoavatara
If you don't like birthright citizenship...work on a constitutional amendment. If you are too lazy to do that, and do the hard work convincing the majority of Americans you are right...well, then you've answered your own question if that is what Americans want or not.
English
@KingIronfoot @Zaphod_B_2025 @jkimballcook I mean, its pretty clear you're going to lose this case. You can either keep complaining on the internet or do something IRL.
English
@ExistentialLab @Zaphod_B_2025 @jkimballcook People like to say this as though it changes anything but they know it won’t
English
anyone who says it is suicidal to keep the same constitutional rule of law that has been the rule in the United States since the founding (with the exception of a few years with Dredd Scott) is just ignorant and hysterical
if there are good reasons to change that rule, amend it
English
@KingIronfoot @Zaphod_B_2025 @jkimballcook You should get to work pressuring your rep to pass an amendment if this is such a pressing issue!
English
@Zaphod_B_2025 @jkimballcook I really don't, no.
I care about my people, not any particular piece of paper.
I think the constitution is brilliant and contains a lot of valuable things. I also think it was written for a different nation than we have and scales poorly onto modern society.
English
@sean91237 @DruidofNecro @Empty_America If your position was really popular it would be easy. Sadly its really unpopular.
English
@DruidofNecro @Empty_America We both know it’s impossible to pass Amendments today.
But the SC can do anything the want.
English
Well I mean we don't actually have to allow 8.5 month pregnant Chinese women to enter the USA to start with.
Screening for outright birth tourism is a choice that the administration could presumably enact at any time.
Upstate Federalist@upstatefederlst
Counterpoint: If I were the Chinese government, I would simply offer every pregnant woman a first class flight and 5-star hotel accommodations in the US at 8.5 months pregnant, wait 20 years, and then conquer the country. Why would I not do this?
English
@HoodlumDoodlum @MitraHispana @BerzekSavant Except ice deports parents of US citizens all the time. The 'anchor' is a bit of rhethoric that doesnt reflect reality.
English
@MitraHispana @BerzekSavant Oh goodness, you’d deport the mother if an infant, a small American baby!? How cruel!
(How do you think the “anchor” part of anchor babies works?)
English
If the ambassador from Chile gives birth here her kid won’t automatically be a citizen. Everyone agrees.
If that same ambassador is fired & expelled the week before she’s due but she hides out & is illegally present here until she gives birth her kid is a citizen.
That’s absurd.
English
@swamthetiber25 @JT_Great21 Yeah. It seems your objection is to certain versions of PSA, not PSA itself .
English
I abhor reformed theology more than just about anything else on Earth.
Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA) is problematic because it can imply a division within the Trinity, portraying the Father as punishing the Son rather than acting in perfect unity of will and love. It frames forgiveness as dependent on satisfying divine wrath through violence instead of as a free act of mercy, and can suggest God is bound by an external standard above Himself of retributive justice. It also raises coherence issues, such as how Christ’s finite suffering could satisfy an eternal penalty, and moral concerns about punishing the innocent when guilt cannot be transferred. Biblically and historically, PSA is difficult find as well.
𝕄𝕚𝕤𝕤𝕪@yesiwetmyplants
Either Christ bore your punishment, or you will. When Jesus hung on the cross, it wasn’t an example of just love only, it was substitution. He was wounded for transgressions that weren’t His. He was crushed for sins He never committed. That’s why the cross matters. If Jesus didn’t actually take the wrath you deserve for your sins, then that wrath still stands against you. God’s justice doesn’t disappear. Sin must be punished. The only question is, was it punished in Christ, or will it be punished in you?
English
@swamthetiber25 @JT_Great21 The penalty is his death on the cross.
English
@ExistentialLab @JT_Great21 what is the penalty? Is it torture and eternal separation that comes from the father?
English
@swamthetiber25 @JT_Great21 Those aren't essential parts of PSA. You're taking issue some interpretations of PSA, not the essential fact that Jesus bore the penalty for our sins.
English
Yes, in this example he died, that is the penalty of sin. We can all agree on this. That is different than the Father torturing the son. The father doesn’t look on the son in hate and anger, but in love at his sacrifice.
I mean no disrespect, but are you familiar with PSA as taught in reformed evangelical circles?
English
@trickydickpol @ASFleischman You take a break from AI slop and check the primary sources to see if the AI hallucinated or is relying on inaccurate partisan summaries. Read Blackstone's English common law thing I linked on whether foreigners and children of foreigners on English soil owe allegiance.
English
English
Mike Lee vigorously argues that it's illegal to deport immigrants because they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Mike Lee@BasedMikeLee
You never address the words “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” It’s amazing what you can declare “clear” in the Constitution when you omit language you don’t like
English
@trickydickpol @ASFleischman You inserted the word 'complete' next to jurisdiction. The word complete isnt in the Amendment. And youre wrong. English common law recognized foreigners on English law owed allegiance to England.
press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/docum…
English
@ExistentialLab @ASFleischman Nah it’s spin because allegiance in the context for “complete jurisdiction” would mean allegiance to the country and political system as it was understood at the time. Not just subject to the laws
English
@trickydickpol @ASFleischman Thats not spin, thats basic English common law.
English
@ASFleischman Why’d you think Jackson try to make some spin that “allegiance” meant “if you were arrested and went to court.”
As she knows allegiance is a major part of “subject to the jurisdiction of.”
Something you think isn’t important despite bent vital to the question at hand.
English
@alwaysready73 @conor64 @megbasham When they were debating the Amendment, they clearly acknowledged it would give citizenship to children of Chinese and Mongolians. And Basham misread Thompson. He was saying foreigners/aliens who were not under us jurisdiction, not all foreigners.
English
@conor64 @megbasham And you're seriously trying to pretend that any significant minority, let alone majority, read it as anything other than what the author himself clarified it to be?
You think they actually thought they were voting to allow foreigners to visit and drop a citizen?
English
The parents have no such right. Individuals born on American soil have the right.
Stephen Miller@StephenM
Congress has passed numerous laws criminalizing, prohibiting, forbidding and barring the entry of unauthorized and inadmissible foreigners. To say that this same class of excluded foreigners — whose very presence here is a crime — when Congress mandated a physical wall to keep them out — have a legal right to birth American Citizens is the gravest and most preposterous of all constitutional abominations.
English
@DBZYuYuYasha @AlizapeBar @greg_price11 I agree . (I suspect Republicans don't think it is a pressing issue either because they're not trying to make legislation to address this. )
English
English
It just feels so painfully obvious that the 14th amendment does not mean that a 9-months pregnant woman from Mexico can cross the Rio Grande illegally, give birth, and be allowed to stay because her child is now a natural born citizen.
English
@BasedLAMusician @adamscochran If it is such a pressing issue, why not try to trade something Dems want (like DC statehood) for the amendment. If citizenship tourism is such a pressing issue you should be willing to give something up to solve it
English
@adamscochran One party wants open borders and no voter ID. The fact you think that we can get a constitutional amendment passed is laughable. The court is about to open the floodgates of citizenship tourism.
English
Gee - almost as if that's why the constitution has a process for amendments.
If you want to amend it, and people actually agree with you, then you can change it.
It is not the job of the President nor the courts to do that.
The Constitution is a living document but it ONLY changes via constitutional amendment.
Clay Travis@ClayTravis
The Supreme Court’s debate today: What did people who have been dead for 150 years intend for their law to mean for a modern situation they never conceived could ever occur?
English
@AlizapeBar @DBZYuYuYasha @greg_price11 That's a lack of imagination on your part because that's clearly what the courts have held since 1898. You either need to crack down on tourism via legislation or get a constitutional amendment if this is such a pressing problem.
English
@DBZYuYuYasha @greg_price11 Border security doesn’t help if a tourist comes here and has a baby. Hard to imagine that’s what the plain reading intended.
English