Supreme Court May Decide Birthright Citizenship Case This Week; RNC Sues Colorado Over Allowing Birth Tourism Foreigners Who Never Even Set Foot in Colorado to Vote There

In the next few days, we may find out if we have a country or not.

May be. The Disney Groomer Corporation is sad.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to weigh in this week on President Donald Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship by executive order, a move which would upend more than a century of legal precedent and a national tradition that have said babies born on American soil are automatically American citizens.

The ruling, one of the most highly anticipated of the year, is a major test of Trump's unprecedented assertion of presidential power in his second term with major stakes for millions of children and their families.

What is birthright citizenship?

Birthright citizenship is the idea that a child automatically becomes a citizen of the country in which they are born, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.

It reflects the principle of jus soli, or right of the soil, extending citizenship purely on the basis of geographic location.

By contrast, many countries extend citizenship under the principle of jus sanguinis, or right of blood, which is determined by the nationality of a child's parents regardless of the location of birth.

How does birthright citizenship work in the U.S.?

With few exceptions, all babies born on U.S. soil become U.S. citizens.

For the approximately 3.6 million children born in American hospitals every year, the birth certificate alone has been the key to obtaining Social Security numbers, passports and early life benefits.

Into adulthood, the birth certificate has been universally recognized as proof of citizenship for such things as voter registration, employment, home loans and military service.

What does the Constitution say about birthright citizenship?

The 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 to address the legal status of former slaves and their descendants, says plainly that all "persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" are citizens.

If they meant to say that all persons born in the US were citizens, they would have just said that. Instead they added an additional qualification: "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." That is, not subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country, that is, not a citizen of another country.

Congress later codified the same language in federal citizenship law enacted in 1940.

Courts and the government have repeatedly interpreted the 14th Amendment to unambiguously confer citizenship on all children born in the U.S., including babies of unauthorized noncitizens and temporary residents, such as asylum seekers, international students, tourists and seasonal workers.

Yes, they have done so by completely ignoring the qualification that you need to be born in the US and be subject to the jurisdiction of the US and not to another country.

Will the Supreme Court agree, finally? I doubt it. Coney Barrett's inclinations are always towards the liberal status quo, unless the case is so clear that it overrides her inclinations. Kavanaugh and Gorsuch both side with liberals in many cases. And Roberts, of course, invented "it's a tax" out of whole cloth -- this had never even been argued by Obama, for the obvious reason that he swore up and down that Obamacare was not a new set of taxes -- to side with the liberal establishment after a brutal influence campaign directed at this weak, status-seeking man.

Meanwhile, in Colorado, we see anew the problem with allowing automatic birthright citizenship. Many people who were born in the US only due to birthright tourism -- flying to the US within a week of delivering a baby to secure that baby US citizenship, before flying back home, usually to China --are permitted to vote in Colorado despite having never, ever actually been residents of Colorado.

Not just birthright citizenship, but birthright permanent voting rights for foreigners living in foreign adversary nations.

The Republican National Committee on Friday filed suit in Denver District state court against Secretary of State Jena Griswold, challenging her office's policy of allowing overseas voters who have never set foot in Colorado to cast ballots in state elections.

Filed just four days before Colorado's primary election, the suit argues Griswold's implementation of the state's overseas voter law runs headlong into the Colorado Constitution's residency requirement.

Griswold is also a candidate for Colorado attorney general in the June 30 Democrat primary.

"Residency is not inherited and cannot be established by proxy," the complaint reads. "An individual who has never personally made Colorado his or her home has not 'resided in this state' within the meaning of Article VII of the Colorado Constitution."

Griswold's office claims that "if you are a United States citizen who has never lived in the United States, you can register to vote in Colorado if your parent, legal guardian, spouse, or domestic partner was a resident of Colorado before leaving the United States."

The complaint argues that allowing residency for voting to pass by proxy through a parent or spouse is unconstitutional, regardless of what the legislature or the secretary of state says.

Joining the RNC in the suit are Douglas County Clerk and Recorder Sheri Davis and U.S. Rep. Jeff Crank, who represents the Colorado Springs area.

The plaintiffs argue the policy is a partisan issue as well as a legal problem, pulling no punches on this point: "it is well understood that the overseas civilian voting bloc, which is partly comprised of these illegal never-resident voters, overwhelmingly supports and votes for Democratic Party candidates."

The latter from Stephen Green of Instapundit.

Also from Green:

Publius @OcrazioCornPop

Trump, 2018: "Haiti is a sh!thole country."

Hollywood Libs: "Haiti is a great, truly beautiful country. Trump is a r*cist!"

Trump (& SCOTUS), 2026: "Temporary means temporary, Haitians have to return home to their great, truly beautiful country."

Hollywood Libs: "Haiti is a sh!thole country. They must be allowed to stay forever."

CHECKMATE, LIBTARDS.

WHY ARE HOLLYWOOD LIBS LIKE THIS?

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 05:30 PM

| Access Comments