I think their behavior borders on Obsessive Ideation: persistent, intrusive thoughts about a public figure, usually tied to unresolved emotional or ideological conflict. Or maybe, Narrative Addiction Disorder (NAD) – The compulsive need to follow and repeat media narratives, regardless of factual contradictions.
Except a simple belief in or assumption of birthright citizenship, absent legislation or Supreme Court jurisprudence, wouldn't, in my opinion, create an ex post facto scenario. We'll see what happens.
Why do you support birthright citizenship? It doesn't even make fucking sense. And the constitution does not grant citizenship to all people born here of illegal migrants. The original intent was to grant citizenship to children of slaves. The civil rights act of 1875 was passed to extend civil rights to African Americans and those born into African American families. Just like R v W, Federal judges issuing universal injunctions, assumed authority that was not explicitly granted to them by constitutional law or interpreted the constitution in a way that's not explicitly expressed within the original writing of the constitution.
Ah, trumps dream. The whitewashing of America. Did you happen to see the Pentagon site after Hegseth’s “DEI” edit?
Please do with credible sources.
CBS wasn't forced to pay anything. They settled the suit to save a merger deal. Every legal expert said if they'd fought it they would have won. The full transcript showed that nothing was wrong with the editing they did.
You first.
Interestingly, a strong believer in the Constitution wants to rewrite or remove the 14th Amendment, which says:
And you say my support of it is projection and doesn't make fucking sense. I support the Constitution. I support the fact that for 125 years, that decision and subsequent applications of it have not destroyed or damaged the USA. Now, in the current Presidency, it has become an impediment and must be cast aside to ease the removal of illegal migrants because one man wants political expediency over justice.
That precedent has stood for over 125 years.
Hey dipshit! You said you could cite them chapter and verse. Shit or get off the fuckin' pot dickhead. Got your damned tits in a wringer and now trying to backpeddle your ass out of it. Amirite?
I’ve quoted that exact phrase in legal arguments supported by some of the most influential and knowledgeable constitutional scholars and lawyers. Just as R v W was a flawed interpretation of the constitution so is childbirth citizenship.
Nope, the 14th, in my opinion, does not grant citizenship to all. There’s this caveat within the 14th stating ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’
Cite where I ever wrote that your belief in the 14th is projection. That’s a lie. This statement by you is where I accused you of projection;
That’s your opinion. A country without borders is not a country. 78 million voters say different. To say that Biden’s immigration policy has not damaged our country is delusional. There’s a big difference between an orderly immigration process and an invasion.
That’s a big negative. Stare decisis (precedent) although binding in most cases does not bind the courts from deviating from precedent if compelling reason’s exists to change bad law or clear errors made in past decisions.
Parents had legal status.
Yet. Stop with your philosophical nonsense. Nowhere in the constitution does it grant citizenship for children born of illegal migrants. This part of the constitution… ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ is where many legal scholars disagree with the present interpretation of the constitution. What you believe and I believe are totally different. We’ll have to wait for a decision from SCOTUS. I find it ironic that if someone challenges a SCOTUS ruling you scold others for failing to follow constitutional principles but it was you and your ilk that went batshit crazy when SCOTUS ruled to overturn R v W and returned that authority back to the states. Only democrats like Schumer on the steps of the Capital threatened justices. It was democrats that doxed supreme court justices threatening their lives. A prime example of the courts deviation from precedent because of bad law, and a prime example of your hypocrisy.
Just about every post you share with us has some sort of denigrating comments towards the Trump’s past and present administrations. You often bring up Trump’s first term.
Democrats have honed vigilante justice to a science. Your lack of self awareness is on the galactic scale, didn’t think it was possible to lack that much self awareness.
Ah, in other words…
Typical bullcrap and pontification. Compeling reasons my ass. There are none. He made this shit straight up from fantansy land. You glory in it with phony self-righteous indignation.
According to who? The fact that 60mins highly edited the interview to put Kami in a better light and attempt to show she had command of her thoughts instead of a rambling word salad is fraud. They attempted to put their thumbs on the scale to swing an election. A 60mins tradition BTW…remember when Danny Rather tried it in ‘04?
Let's get back on this horse and ride it again cause I've had dinner and find a rereading of this to be a lot of pissing in the wind for effect.
Off topic but what the hell!
Good afternoon.
You need to read more
That's bullshit. They were forced to settle by political, economic, and legal reality.
You must be reading highly partisan sites. Others are reporting what @zysmith said.
That's a false statement, Bubba. It has been pointed out numerous times here that it is untrue. He was a felon at the time of his verdict and sentencing. That he has an appeal process doesn't negate that.
At my age, I'm not sure we have complete control over ourselves either. But you and I can agree on what's true about politics.
