Lucas

@DebaterProblems FUCK THE DA IS TRUE

@intalekshewal @JDStokes79 @Cory38702438622 @RealTheoWold @Cernovich Supreme court justices do tend to be intellectuals

@JDStokes79 @Cory38702438622 @RealTheoWold @Cernovich You’re not an intellectual. Quit trying so hard.

It's a simple Constitutional question: Does the 14th amendment require that America accept children born to illegal foreigners as citizens? The answer is quite obviously no. If the right of American citizenship belongs to the world, then American longer a sovereign country.

@RealTheoWold As written, yes. Your interpretation draws from an ideological basis, not a historical or constitutional one

@liam_mcknight @D_SAUC3Y @spooner_fed @tw_Rosebud @phillisi1174 @adamscochran Sure, if it somehow gets abolished or something, your batshit idea would be a potential new standard. Britain did not have birthright citizenship (and I'm not sure they do even now)

@liam_mcknight @D_SAUC3Y @spooner_fed @tw_Rosebud @phillisi1174 @adamscochran Man Goizueta has really dropped their standards, huh Press gangs is a bad example because right now citizenship is not contingent upon service. It's contingent upon being born somewhere the US claims legal jurisdiction

One of the most insane arguments is the idea that your parents status matters. “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” applies to the person born. It does not say your parents must be subject to the jurisdiction. Even though they would be subject to it, if they were not, the child still could be. Which is the very reason that the US makes a tax obligation on everyone born in the US, on their lifetime worldwide income. So the US has, for decades, been arguing they do have birthright jurisdiction to people born in the US (including those born to illegal immigrants) by nature of levying a tax on income those people earn, even if they return to their parents home country.

@spooner_fed @tw_Rosebud @adamscochran @liam_mcknight Killing people is generally the goal of an invading army, yes. Although there's no definition of an invading army that fits for undocumented immigrants, so they're subject to US jurisdiction

@tw_Rosebud @adamscochran @liam_mcknight Got it. The children of an invading army are not subject to our laws and neither are their parents. Therefore, the parents should be allowed to kill as many people as possible, right? If the killing is not illegal, there is no power to stop the act.

@fishjETH @DCinvestor It only reinforces our power if it's a clear cut victory that demonstrates overwhelming superiority. The fact that Iran is fighting back and putting a lot of pressure on US forces, allies, and interests has China and Russia taking notice, but they're probably thinking we're weak

“Destroying American global influence”? Quite the opposite. Demonstrating that the U.S. will use force to keep vital sea lanes open reinforces deterrence, signals that attacks on global commerce carry real costs, and reminds allies and adversaries alike that American power still underwrites the international system. That is not retreat. That is influence.

Trump saying “reopen the strait yourselves” to all allies will be tantamount to telling every nation to cut deals directly with Iran, who will no doubt require them to eschew the petrodollar and possibly much more in their relationships with the US in a strait which everyone was free to use 2 months ago wtf did we even accomplish with all of this other than massively destroying American global influence??

@alexisence Map C It artificially splits SLC to deny Democrats any representation, effectively disenfranchising them from voting. You can't identify a gerrymander by just shapes, you identify it by how those shapes impact representation

Identify the most gerrymandered map in Utah history: Map C or Map 1. Go!

@benelli14597445 @chicagobars actually it's precisely for that reason. Tribal lands are weird in terms of jurisdiction, as in the extent of authority. The law clarified it for citizenship. Citizen being attached to the boundaries of state authority (birthright) gave rise to the need for clarification

@chicagobars What does Gorsuchs interest in native Americans show about how he's likely to rule? Why did the 1920s law have to be passed making Indians - citizens if that already was achieved in the 1860s with the 14th amendment

They'll be teaching this exchange below in law school moot court prep for years....because Gorsuch considering the impact on Native Americans in almost any case before him has been a known thing for years to even the most casual Court watchers (me). moderntreatise.com/opinion/third-…

@rwmoore001 @PulseOrbit @EricLDaugh I expect nothing less from the moron who doesn't realize that a country can be both a democracy *and* a constitutional republic at the same time, but at least do a little research

@rwmoore001 @PulseOrbit @EricLDaugh Edgar Cowen explicitly talked about it on the Senate floor when it was being debated, and it was the reason he voted against it. It's kinda hard to say they couldn't conceive of a situation that they explicitly talked about during deliberation

🚨 BREAKING: SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito says it PERFECTLY on birthright citizenship He suggests that just because illegal aliens were not a problem at the time the 14th Amendment was adopted does NOT mean they shouldn't be addressed today Nailed it. ALITO: "Justice Scalia had an example that dealt with this situation. He imagined an old theft statute that was enacted well before anybody conceived of a microwave oven, and then afterwards someone is charged with the crime of stealing a microwave oven, and this fellow says, well, I can't be convicted under this because the microwave oven didn't exist at that time." "And he dismissed that. There's a general rule there, and you apply it to future applications. And what we're dealing with here is something that was basically unknown at the time when the 14th Amendment was adopted, which is illegal immigration. So how do we deal with that situation when we have a general rule?" JOHN SAUER: "Yeah, I strongly agree with the way that you framed it, that there is a general principle that's a broad principle that's adopted in the phrase, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, and we submit that our theory of allegiance and domicile-based allegiance is what explains those specific exceptions that everybody was aware of, but it is broad enough to sweep in future situations, and as you pointed out, illegal immigration did not exist then." You can almost ALWAYS count on Alito!

@rwmoore001 @PulseOrbit @EricLDaugh For reference I've read the entirety of the federalist papers

@rwmoore001 @PulseOrbit @EricLDaugh This amendment was proposed post civil-war, and immigration was explicitly debated during the process of adopting it. An originalist would look at the intentions by those who proposed the amendment, who addressed this exact argument

@BartDePalma @LHwanderlust @EdWhelanEPPC Actually the method for detecting large scale fraudulent voting would generally show up in publicly available data. The US does not exhibit those indicators. I think anyone who believes it does simply doesn't understand how elections are administered

@LHwanderlust @EdWhelanEPPC Nothing exists until you look. Blue states fighting tooth and nail to keep you from looking tells the tale/

It is impossible for states to “disobey” an executive order. An executive order is a vehicle by which a president directs executive-branch officials how to administer existing law. Trump cannot “mandate” how states administer their absentee-ballot laws. Insofar as the EO will threaten to withhold federal funds, Trump will need a statutory basis for imposing that condition. (And if he has one, why hasn’t he acted before now?)

@amogussy676767 @JCDenton654 @MathRockSucked Guy who can't imagine that other people have different meanings for a rating system than him:

@JCDenton654 @MathRockSucked In my eyes a 6/10 isnt something I'd ever play, but idk Either way Crimson desert absolutely in no world is a 6/10. Trash like COD or EA sports games are 6/10.

No one has said this btw

@amogussy676767 @MathRockSucked Oh my god, *one* guy didn't like it? Stop the presses! Surely this is a widespread campaign!

@MathRockSucked They literally did say exactly this, one dude at IGN gave it a 6 and Marathon a 9.

@arlowhite Italy didn't qualify. Cry me a river

Is Curacao being in the World Cup and Italy not, ultimately, a good thing?

@Unplugnukes @DiabloCanyonCA ... There aren't hundreds of thousands of workers in the nuclear power sector. It gets most of the data from ionizing radiation in healthcare, stuff like X rays. Nuclear plant workers tend to have better radiation mitigation anyway, due to pretty strict regulations

@lfppersonal @DiabloCanyonCA This was a study that used measured doses from hundreds of thousands of nuke plant workers from the US, UK, and France. Low doses killed them. The same low doses that people who live near nuke plants get year after year.

Diablo Canyon’s two reactors generate ~2,250 megawatts of reliable, ⁠clean electricity, enough for 4 million people.⁠

@Unplugnukes @DiabloCanyonCA Citation needed, because this just isn't true.

@lfppersonal @DiabloCanyonCA You are ignorant. Nukes routinely release radiation into the environment. The majority leak radioactive tritium every day.

@Unplugnukes @DiabloCanyonCA Not to mention, again, but fossil fuels are a thousand times worse! Your choice is between nuclear and fossil fuels, and your dumbass is choosing fossil fuels!

@Unplugnukes @DiabloCanyonCA "low doses" don't endanger people nearby because (shocker) ionizing radiation has a really hard time making it through the fuck tons of shielding a reactor has!