The Supreme Court sided with Maryland parents in a dispute over whether parents can keep their elementary school kids out of public school instruction they say violates their religious beliefs on gender and sexuality. The court's latest bolstering of religion in public life split the justices 6-3, with Republican appointees in the majority and Democratic appointees dissenting.

Why do Democrats want to LGBTQ our kids so bad?

#11 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2025-06-27 11:5

Why is it illegal to teach a federal law?

It's about time someone told the democrats they lost. Democrats need to leave Trump alone and let him govern.
It's also not good that they are only about stopping Trump, who the American People elected, from carrying out his agenda, which the American People want.
#3 | Posted by boaz

So, when President AOC issues an Executive Order outlawing individual gun ownership, EVERY SINGLE GUN OWNER will now have to sue to have their gun rights restored

Moronic magat scum NEVER think things through.

Cause remember AOC will be elected to enact her agenda and you need to let her do it.

Gun grabbing is a clear violation of the Constitution.

#26 | Posted by BellRinger

so is birthright citizenship dumbass

Trump had issued an executive order that would deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of people who are in the country illegally
Jesus, that is common sense, why did we need a court case to decide that?

#4 | Posted by boaz at 2025-06-27 11:37 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Because the Democrats don't reproduce Boaz so they need to import their voters.

#5 | Posted by Bluewaffles

Christ you people are so ------- ignorant it is not funny

Like how do you put your pants on?

You've read it correctly. Gays are not entitled to rights

Begs the question why didn't the authors state birthright citizenship only applied to former slaves?

By teaching them federal law?

You're a sicko

Another reason why this decision is incredibly, mind-boggling stupid.

The inevitable result will be a patchwork of jurisdictions with different definitions of citizenship.

So a child born to undocumented immigrants in CT say is a citizen, but if that child moves to GA, say, that child may no longer be a citizen

Can you magat scum understand the problems with this?

Boaz,
"Birthright citizenship was for slaves kids, not illegals"
The 14th Amendment made the freed slaves citizens, along with their children. Their children became citizens not because their parents were, but because they were born in the US and under its legal jurisdiction.
By contrast, children born abroad to US citizens get their citizenship through their parents and not their birthplace.
That distinction matters. The 14th Amendment wasn't written to give automatic citizenship to the children of people who crossed the border illegally and have no lawful status.
It was about correcting a historic injustice and not about handing out citizenship to anyone who happens to be born on US soil.
Somewhere along the line, that line got blurred and we've been misapplying it ever since.

#62 | Posted by BillJohnson at 20

Are you saying the author's of the 14th amendment were ignorant of it's meaning?

You are both stupid and evil.

an ugly combination.

It's always funny when a guy with a GED tries to be a lawyer.
It's equally funny when they CHEERED for judges doing this during the Biden years.
MAGAts are such sad little cry babies.
Tell me if #51 is how you want things.

#69 | Posted by Sycophant

Very true, like when a court issued a nationwide stay on the use of mifepristone. (until saner brains caught up)

Again

what this decision results in is different definitions of what a US citizen is. In some jurisdictions a state may decide a child of an undocumented immigrant is a citizen. In another jurisdiction a state may say a child of an undocumented immigrant is NOT a citizen

How does that play out?

Is that child subject to deportation if they cross a state line?

What about entitlements that person is eligible for?

What about voting rights? If that child moves to a -------- state, can they vote in presidential elections but not local elections?

What about marriages that child (upon reaching an age of consent) enters into?

Can that child seek federal elected office?

The damage this ruling can do to our country is incredible.

Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So, a child born of undocumented parents is a citizen of CT, say.

14th says, unequivocally, "are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

So that child is a citizen of the United States

that child moves to GA, say, who follow -------- EO.

Is that child a citizen of the US or not?

The enforcement of the ban is not permitted nationwide

it is a literal -----------

Keep in mind too, that eventually with fetal personhood, this question will not apply to birth but conception.

The US will need to know exactly when and where you banged to determine if your child is a citizen or not.