SCOTUS to Hear Case Challenging Birthright Citizenship

#20 Apparently, Left Hind Turds completely forgot about this:

Nuns with dated ID turned away at Ind. polls

About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from a polling place by a fellow sister because they didn't have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.

www.nbcnews.com

They've been trying to take away Americas' right to vote for some time now.

Your insistence on the bullexcrement of "no one is taking away voting rights" sounds a lot like the insane postings of Major DEI Boazo about how there's absolutely no democracy in America.

Birthright citizenship was for black slaves, but of course liberals have perverted it's use.

Like they do everything else.

That would prevent people from exploiting the birthright law.

#17 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Because only the Mad King gets to exploit loopholes in the law.

Must have one parent who is here legally, according to Trump.
That would prevent people from exploiting the birthright law.

#17 | Posted by BillJohnson

According to Trump?

Trump's an idiot. And apparently so are you.

Constitutional amendments CANNOT be repealed by executive order.

Only a combined effort between Congress and state legislatures can repeal an amendment and, even then, the process is long and complicated. Repealing an amendment requires a two-thirds majority in Congress and a three-fourths majority of ratification by the states.

Another waste of taxpayer money.

Good luck with your ILLEGAL ORDERS MAGA maroons.

You will be held accountable.

Constitutional amendments CANNOT be repealed by executive order.

Maybe they can if SCOTUS says so. They are the Gods of Olympus and all.

Constitutional amendments CANNOT be repealed by executive order.

Its not a repeal, its an interpretation.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof (United States), are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

The correct interpretation is that a child born in the US is only a US citizen if there is no other claim (jurisdiction).

If a child is born from a parent/family line, then the child is of family line nationality. The purpose of this caveat is to allow people from familyline nationality laws to have children here, and keep them that nationality. Its not controversial, you just need to understand english.

This would mean a child born of Mexican national parents would be a US citizen.
Whereas a child born from parents in China (my daughters) would be Chinese citizen only. Today she holds both US and Chinese citizenship, this is very common here.

#23 Only black slaves, Major DEI Boazo?

Well, the "black" part certainly leaves you out, right?

About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from a polling place by a fellow sister because they didn't have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.
www.nbcnews.com

I don't see the problem.

#27 Since when were you confirmed to the SCOTUS, onepigironheadedsmoothbrainaut?

#29 Of course you don't onepigheadedsmoothbrainaut.

"Birthright citizenship was for black slaves"

You'd prefer if the descendants of slaves were never considered equal to whites.

We get it.

Whereas a child born from parents in China (my daughters) would be Chinese citizen only. Today she holds both US and Chinese citizenship, this is very common here.

#27 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

This is not China Commie Spyboy.

We have a Constitution.

It's not "common" here.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof (United States), are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Its not a repeal, its an interpretation.

What's to interpret? Which word do you not understand Commie Spyboy? Maybe someone can help you with your English translation.

Birthright citizenship was for black slaves, but of course liberals have perverted it's use.
Like they do everything else.

Supreme Court Precedents: The landmark case United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) confirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are citizens.

Sure sounds like a black slave name.

Wong Kim Ark (1898) confirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are citizens.

Sure sounds like a black slave name.
#34 | Posted by Nixon

Wu Tang Clan ...

Et Al asked the fundamental question to this case. Should be very interesting

"...or travel, or drink alcohol, or drive.."

The bride and I just did all three. ~4,400 miles, five National Parks, and 22 days on the road.

I never had to show my ID once. The bride did, but only for us to use our National Park Lifetime Pass.

#37. You didn't fly or purchase any booze.

@#18 ... Would not a more direct and effective method be denying tourist visas' to pregnant people? ...

Agreed.

Solve the problem at the border.

Especially Russians going to Florida to give birth so their child is a US Citizen.

Mother Russia: South Florida sees a boom in birth tourism' (2019)
apnews.com

... Every year, hundreds of pregnant Russian women travel to the United States to give birth so that their child can acquire all the privileges of American citizenship.

They pay anywhere from $20,000 to sometimes more than $50,000 to brokers who arrange their travel documents, accommodations and hospital stays, often in Florida. ...

"You didn't fly or purchase any booze."

We didn't fly. But we purchased plenty of booze, from dining, wine stores, and liquor stores. Never an ID check.

Meanwhile, voting is a right, and there are folks in rooms calculating how many votes will be suppressed by road construction, or speed traps, or busline problems, or further ID requirements.

And, as always, additional barriers will suppress many more votes than go fraudulent.

But go ahead, and chant the Suppressionists Mantra with me: An Additional Barrier to Voting Isn't an Additional Barrier to Voting!

" But we purchased plenty of booze, from dining, wine stores, and liquor stores. Never an ID check"

Wow. I still get carded when purchasing booze at a store (not a restaurant though). You and the bride must look old as zombies. Regardless, younger folks expect to have to show ID to purchase booze or tobacco

So, Danforth seems to oppose showing photo ID to vote. I'm curious to hear what,if any, security measures Danforth supports when it comes to voting integrity.

Is our voting integrity broken?

I only ever hear of republican politicians doing voter shenanigans, and that's rare too.

@#40 ... We didn't fly. But we purchased plenty of booze, ...

While I would not characterize it as "plenty of booze."

Back in the day, before Connecticut allowed package stores (a.k.a. liquor stores) to open on Sundays, there was all but a line of cars going over the the open liquor stores in neighboring New York on Sunday afternoons too buy a six-pack for the NFL games.

@41 ... Wow. I still get carded when purchasing booze at a store ...

Nearly four decades ago, I went to attend a concert at Toad's Place in New Haven, CT.

The bouncer at the door said to me, "ID please."

I said, "you're kidding?"

He repeated, "ID, please."

So I showed him my driver license.

His comment was, "oh."

I was in my late 30's at the time, with graying hair.

I still get carded and I'm approaching 50.

Very little visible grey.

"Danforth seems to oppose showing photo ID to vote."

What I know is an additional barrier to voting is ALWAYS an additional barrier to voting. These folks had to show IDs when they registered.

I also know in-person voter fraud is phenomenally rare, for many reasons, including logistics, risk/return, and human nature.

Besides, in-person voting is the easiest type to suppress, with long lines, fewer precincts, construction on the main arteries, speed traps, reduced voting windows, laws against handing folks water bottles, etc, etc.

" I'm curious to hear what,if any, security measures Danforth supports when it comes to voting integrity."

All of them enforced when they registered.

Are you that guy who thinks somebody can get back in line nine times at the same precinct?!?

@#40 ... Meanwhile, voting is a right, and there are folks in rooms calculating how many votes will be suppressed by road construction, or speed traps, or busline problems, or further ID requirements. ...

Yeah, it is that ID requirements that is an issue.

Let me state up front, I have no problem with the need to show an ID to vote.

The problem I have is the GOP making it more and more difficult for those who typically do not vote for Republicans to obtain an ID for voting.

For example, closing DMV offices in largely Black counties, requiring people there to travel long distances to get a voter ID.

@#47 ... I also know in-person voter fraud is phenomenally rare, for many reasons, including logistics, risk/return, and human nature. ...

Yup.

And the cases of voter fraud seem to mainly involve Republicans.

Let me state up front, I have no problem with the need to show an ID to vote.

You have to show ID to register, and I've seen no evidence that this process is corrupted.

"You and the bride must look old as zombies."

Sometimes the order tells folks your age.

Back when I was a young bartender, I had a rule to card EVERYONE who ordered a "Seven and Seven".

One night three underage kids came in. The first ordered a 7&7, and I thought, I'm gonna card these kids. The next ordered a Tom Collins, and I thought, I'm REALLY going to card these kids.

The third ordered, and I quote, "Rum and Coke...Jack Daniels if you got it."

Turned out, none of them got their drink.

" the cases of voter fraud seem to mainly involve Republicans."

Yep. And do you know the most common reason, when one is given?

I thought the other side was doing it.

@#50 ... You have to show ID to register, ...

... and I have no problem with showing an ID to indicate that I am the person who registered with my name so that I can vote with that name.

The problem is not showing the ID. That's the symptom.

The problem is the roadblock(s) the Republicans throw in front of those who want to obtain the necessary ID. (whether to register or to vote).

Don't try to solve the symptom, solve the root problem.

There as a song in 1988 or so by a group Big Mouth, from their album Quite Not Right, the CD of which I do have here (not yet convinced that is something I might want to admit..).

The song, apparently based upon a Netflix series, and for which I find no video, has the lyrics..
...

genius.com

...
Hey, guys
No problem tonight
The guy at the door is a personal friend of mine

It's the first thing you hear
When you try to slip into a bar
Just say that you left it
Outside in your car

So you back out the door
And you think it's a sin
'Cause without the right identification
They won't let you back in

You need ID
To get into a bar
You need ID
To drive a car
Where's your ID?

I can only imagine what it would be worth
To have a slip of paper with a pre-dated birth
You could say to the bouncer, "This ain't no jive
It's a fact, I was born in 1945"

You need ID
To get into a bar
You need ID
To drive a car
You need ID
When they say no
So what are we supposed to do?
Where are we supposed to go?

You need ID
Or you won't get far
You need ID
To be a star
Identity
So what are we supposed to do?
Where are we supposed to go?
I don't know

There is some required identification
To achieve any level of inebriation
(I can't get no) gratification
'Cause I won't be of age 'til after graduation

No, no, no
Hey, hey, hey
No, no, no
Hey, hey, he-hey

Motels keep us out
Makes me want to shout
Got no place to go
No ID to show

I took a lovely lady out on a date
With the hope that after dinner
She would take the bait
So when the waitress came
I ordered Coke with rum
But she looked at me and said
"You must be 21"
...

Years back in Kansas, Kris Kobach begged the legislature to empower him to go after illegal alien voter fraud, saying he had over 100 cases ready to file. They empowered him, and budgeted millions of dollars.

After four years, he had NINE convictions: a pair of addled old retirees, 4 folks who moved from Western Kansas (super red country) to Eastern Colorado (super red country) and voted in both, 2 folks who voted for a deceased member of the household (one was caught when he properly dated the dead voter's "signature"), and ONE ILLEGAL ALIEN.

Kobach also famously headed up Trump's quest to find the "three million" fraudulent votes, which had been falsely claimed. He couldn't find a single one.

BTW, a podcast called "Stuff You Should Know" did a deep dive on that "three million" claim, and brought in statisticians to explain chunks of it away: folks who'd moved, folks with the same name, etc. They'd initially subtracted every subset they could find, but were perplexed when they still had 20,000 clear matches: Names and birthdates matched exactly. Fraud, right? Well, not quite:

As it turned out, the most common similar name/date was on March 19th. The name? Josephina Hernandez. FTA, March 19th is the most sacred feast day in the Latino community, for St. Joseph.

The second most common match? March 17th. The name? Patrick Kelly.

There were also a lot of matches named April, May, June, Autumn, Holly, and Noel.

You have to show ID to register, and I've seen no evidence that this process is corrupted.
#50 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

Not in CA.

To be clear, this is why a DOG was able to vote.

To be clear, this is why a DOG was able to vote.

IAMRUNT, that was your fellow repug.

www.latimes.com

@#55 ... Years back in Kansas, Kris Kobach begged the legislature to empower him to go after illegal alien voter fraud, saying he had over 100 cases ready to file. They empowered him, and budgeted millions of dollars.

Kobach also famously headed up Trump's quest to find the "three million" fraudulent votes, which had been falsely claimed.

He couldn't find a single one. ...

That seems to have been repeated over and over.

Lots of accusations of widespread voter fraud, but little to back up those accusations.

To be fair, the dog has a higher IQ than most Trump voters.

#47 What I know is an additional barrier to voting is ALWAYS an additional barrier to voting. These folks had to show IDs when they registered.

#50 ... You have to show ID to register, ...

Where did you get this idea? Texas, me, and Florida, Corky, I don't know where Alexandrite lives, do not require presentation of an ID to register to vote according to their online registration applications. FL asks for a DL number or last four of SSN. TX ask for DL number if issued and if not last four of SSN. Nor am I aware of any other state requiring presentation of ID to register.

To vote, yes but not to register. For registration is it superfluous.

BTW as is well known I support voter ID. I also support making it as easy as possible to comply and exemptions for folks who have difficulty obtaining compliance documents because of when or where they were born.

ET AL- I live in Michigan, and they always ask for photo ID where I vote.

Good to see you. *tips hat*

I should add you can vote without a photo ID if you sign an affidavit.

#62

You are missing the nuance. Many states require ID to vote. I'm okay with that. I'm not aware of any state that requires ID to register, that is what I addressed not ID to vote.

That said, Michigan online voter registration application asks for DL or state Id number and if not available last four of SSN. Anyone seeing a pattern? ID requested but not required to register.

@#64 ... You are missing the nuance. Many states require ID to vote. I'm okay with that. I'm not aware of any state that requires ID to register, that is what I addressed not ID to vote. ...

Good point.

I just checked.

I don't see an ID requirement in my state (CT) to register.

While I do see an ID requirement to vote.

Thanks, I may start asking questions of State officials. :)

... The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case on whether some children born in the US have a constitutional right to citizenship ...

What does the Constitution say about this?

@#66

Found this ...

constitution.congress.gov

...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. ...