Maybe your expectations were too high if you thought that a far-fetched constitutional theory would win outright.
Imagine if the anti-abortion lobby said "oh, well, we lost 7-2, and then we lost again 6-3, and again". And their arguments were far more straightforward than this counterintuitive reading (btw, I find birthright citizenship to be incredibly stupid).
Obviously, it wasn't meant to be applied to illegals, but the way it's written seems pretty straightforward.
If you're disappointed, you should really look at the initial reaction to Trump's order. It sure didn't sound like they thought this would get 4 votes. Rather, they were saying that it would be laughed out of court. It wasn't.
I mean, clearly we've been operating under birthright for a long time, it would be a massive change to throw it out now. It's just insane how the court decides to become strict textualists when it's something that helps the left. Meanwhile when clear and plain language the left dislikes is brought up we have to hear about "emanations and penumbras." E.g. segregation.
Surely you can't be serious? As if we have time to take some weird solace in some meaningless moral victory that accomplishes actually nothing?
Sir, please don't engage with the troll. Seriously, you're talking to an instigative moron.
Nah, Tony's not a troll he's just a dumb foreigner.
Maybe your expectations were too high if you thought that a far-fetched constitutional theory would win outright.
Imagine if the anti-abortion lobby said "oh, well, we lost 7-2, and then we lost again 6-3, and again". And their arguments were far more straightforward than this counterintuitive reading (btw, I find birthright citizenship to be incredibly stupid).
Far-fetched? It would be the normal understanding when the amendment was written.
Obviously, it wasn't meant to be applied to illegals, but the way it's written seems pretty straightforward.
If you're disappointed, you should really look at the initial reaction to Trump's order. It sure didn't sound like they thought this would get 4 votes. Rather, they were saying that it would be laughed out of court. It wasn't.
it didn't even apply to the indians, of course they didn't apply it to squatemalans and chinese tourists
now that fucking turk gets to gloat
Again, if you asked the guys who wrote it originally, they would laugh at the idea it gave citizenship to illegals. Don't change the subject.
I mean, clearly we've been operating under birthright for a long time, it would be a massive change to throw it out now. It's just insane how the court decides to become strict textualists when it's something that helps the left. Meanwhile when clear and plain language the left dislikes is brought up we have to hear about "emanations and penumbras." E.g. segregation.