If you don't think an administration can have policies which are wrong and unconstitutional, I refer you to the current administration.
And if you don't think a court can have rulings which are wrong and unconstitutional, I refer you to the current court, (Obamacare) and many previous courts. (Roe, Wickard, Plessy, etc.)
Oh, and by the way... Plessy v. Ferguson and Wong Kim Ark were THE SAME COURT!
Now *YOU* need to defend their ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson with the same degree of "the court can do no wrong" stupidity with which you have been defending the Wong Kim Ark decision. I will further point out that Plessy v. Ferguson is a 7-1 decision, while your Wong Kim Ark is only a 6-2, which in Jeff-"the court is GOD"-speak means that the Plessy decision has more legal validity than does the Wong decision!
Come on loudmouth. Tell us how the court you worship is so unerringly correct that you are willing to vouch for their correctness in the case of Plessy v Ferguson! Let Jeff explain to us how this court could not have made a mistake, and how anyone who thinks the court may be mistaken is an idiot or something.
This ought to be good.
Now *YOU* need to defend their ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson with the same degree of "the court can do no wrong" stupidity with which you have been defending the Wong Kim Ark decision.
No, I don't. I never said the Court could do no wrong. I have simply said that in this particular case, based on all of the legal and historical evidence, they got it right.
You want to move the goal post. "Ah, you have to, Plessy v. Ferguson, blah, blah, blah."
I'm sorry, but we're not talking about Plessy v. Ferguson. We're talking about the fact that your stupid birther claim is complete bullcrap.
As shown by post 167, by the entire weight of what every real early authority had to say on the matter, and by what the US Supreme Court had to say in US v Wong Kim Ark.