Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Snowybear

There was some fascinating legal coverage during the campaign, which covered this, I think on CSPAN, from some of President Trump’s team. It eviscerated the 14th Amendment justification for anchor babies.
As for the courts, they’ve been pulling stuff out of their rear for a long time.


1,372 posted on 01/06/2020 6:11:13 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1362 | View Replies ]


To: grey_whiskers

One of the considerations that SCOTUS consistently does NOT undertake is to ask the question, “why didn’t the previous court change the original?”

Meaning, why didn’t the previous courts either define or alter the Constitutional “natural born citizen” requirement? Was it because the common-sense understanding was not being changed or considered?

Follow-on is, since the court ignored the foundational concept of NBC, whether or not this would be valid reason to retain it.

Seems that history begins with each case?
Precedent? We don’t need no stinking precedent.


1,381 posted on 01/06/2020 6:29:24 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (The Republican Party: Freeing Americans since 1865.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1372 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson