Latest Breaking News

Escurumbele

(4,093 posts)

32. Wow, had not seen your response but mine was exactly the same..."With this court?"

Mon Mar 30, 2026, 07:35 AM

11 hrs ago

I would have added the word "corrupt"...

I have always been an optimist but, with what has been going on with this administration, the court, I hate that I am becoming a pessimist, I really hate that.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Looking to limit birthright citizenship, Trump turns to an 1884 Supreme Court ruling against a Native American man [View all] BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP

Can't wait to hear the arguments before the court. Fiendish Thingy Yesterday #1

With THIS court? bluestarone Yesterday #3

My guess, 7-2 against. Nt Fiendish Thingy 23 hrs ago #8

I know for sure bluestarone 23 hrs ago #10

Wow, had not seen your response but mine was exactly the same..."With this court?" Escurumbele 11 hrs ago #32

Weak sauce. bucolic_frolic Yesterday #2

Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 nullified Elk v Wilkins Historic NY Yesterday #4

Since the SCOTUS doesn't care about "stare decisis" BumRushDaShow Yesterday #6

But this isn't stare decicis Fiendish Thingy 23 hrs ago #9

Have you forgotten BumRushDaShow 23 hrs ago #11

Haven't forgotten at all Fiendish Thingy 23 hrs ago #12

"if birthright citizenship is revoked, can the reinstitution of slavery still be off limits?" BumRushDaShow 23 hrs ago #13

All the more reason why we must only elect Dem senators willing to kill the filibuster and expand the court Fiendish Thingy 22 hrs ago #15

Roe was focused on enforcement of the PRIVATE right for women to choose what to do with her own body BumRushDaShow 13 hrs ago #30

And that horrific ruling will continue to stand Fiendish Thingy 9 hrs ago #36

That was the hope in 2022 BumRushDaShow 8 hrs ago #37

That's because Biden wanted to wait on the report from the bipartisan commission on court reform Fiendish Thingy 6 hrs ago #42

Not exactly. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #17

Birthright citizenship is also a law LeftInTX 21 hrs ago #23

It is the interpretation of the constitution that is at issue. Ms. Toad 20 hrs ago #24

I disagree Fiendish Thingy 20 hrs ago #25

"If the constitution says two term limit for a president, it doesn't mean three" BumRushDaShow 10 hrs ago #33

But the Constitution doesn't say two terms for a p president. Ms. Toad 10 hrs ago #34

Two means two, not three Fiendish Thingy 9 hrs ago #35

Again, you are reducing a paragraph to a single word. Ms. Toad 8 hrs ago #38

At this time, it's probably a moot point Fiendish Thingy 6 hrs ago #43

Except that the US constitution does NOT Farmer-Rick 19 hrs ago #27

Article III of the constitution and Marbury v. Madison. Ms. Toad 7 hrs ago #39

In that Supreme Court ruling Farmer-Rick 7 hrs ago #41

I'll see Elk v. Wilkins, cloudbase Yesterday #5

The funny thing is, Wong Ark was decided in 1898 NickB79 21 hrs ago #18

Trump would have required both parents to be wnylib 23 hrs ago #7

Doesn't seem relevant Renew Deal 22 hrs ago #14

So at that time territories weren't considered "The US"? Callie1979 21 hrs ago #20

That's the way I'm reading it Renew Deal 21 hrs ago #22

I Think They Are Talking About Indian Territories DallasNE 18 hrs ago #28

If thats the story then it would seem to have zero meaning to today's case. Callie1979 13 hrs ago #31

What total bullshit. Another argument of convenience. Scalded Nun 22 hrs ago #16

Sounds like a "3/5ths" argument; seen as lesser individuals. Callie1979 21 hrs ago #19

This case in an interpretation that is consistent with how the provision has always been interpreted. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #21

I'm not buying that argument Bayard 20 hrs ago #26

Call DHS Immediately! Nasruddin 16 hrs ago #29

pedo and his henchmen should move to Tx or Fl and let the rest of us get our country back Marthe48 7 hrs ago #40