- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:44 am to atlgamecockman
Read Gorsuch's dissent since it was the most interesting thing to me that he dissented. He essentially says they shouldn't strike down the EO because part of it isn't facially invalid as applied to people here on temporary visas, BUT he hinted he believes children of illegals are still citizens.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:44 am to Ingeniero
quote:
SFP is about to have 0 billable hours today with all the victory laps and "told you so's" he's due for
No one is shocked they ruled this way. They just ruled wrong.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:45 am to Ingeniero
Kav tells Congress to go do some work
quote:
As others have noted, Kavanaugh writes that Trump's EO conflicts with the federal law "[u]nless and until Congress enacts" new legislation.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:45 am to rt3
So anchor babies is a go, still? That is so fricking dumb.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:45 am to atlgamecockman
quote:
Why didn't Trump put you on the court instead of Kav or ACB?
Because I'm not a judge.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:46 am to rt3
quote:
av tells Congress to go do some work
quote:
As others have noted, Kavanaugh writes that Trump's EO conflicts with the federal law "[u]nless and until Congress enacts" new legislation.
yeah, scream it from the top of the mountains.
The whole country should be revolting over the do-nothing Congress. It's disgusting.
This post was edited on 6/30/26 at 9:48 am
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:46 am to Ingeniero
Seems to be. Read three articles on it and none of them gave the breakdown of the vote or referred to it as unanimous.
Did find a bit about the case (I had not read anything about it):
Becky Pepper-Jackson, a 16-year-old high school sophomore in Bridgeport, West Virginia, has been taking puberty-blocking medication, has publicly identified as a girl since age 8 and has been issued a West Virginia birth certificate recognizing her as female. She is the only transgender person who has sought to compete in girls sports in West Virginia.
Pepper-Jackson has progressed from a back-of-the-pack cross-country runner in middle school to statewide champion in the shot put. She beat the second-place finisher by two feet in last month's West Virginia championship meet.
Similar to the long jump winner in Cali last year. A huge difference between first and second. More than a bit surprised it was unanimous.
Did find a bit about the case (I had not read anything about it):
Becky Pepper-Jackson, a 16-year-old high school sophomore in Bridgeport, West Virginia, has been taking puberty-blocking medication, has publicly identified as a girl since age 8 and has been issued a West Virginia birth certificate recognizing her as female. She is the only transgender person who has sought to compete in girls sports in West Virginia.
Pepper-Jackson has progressed from a back-of-the-pack cross-country runner in middle school to statewide champion in the shot put. She beat the second-place finisher by two feet in last month's West Virginia championship meet.
Similar to the long jump winner in Cali last year. A huge difference between first and second. More than a bit surprised it was unanimous.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:46 am to rt3
Just pass a law prohibiting pregnant non-citizens from entering the country.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:46 am to rt3
quote:
Kav tells Congress to go do some work
Not possible. We will never get a Constitutional amendment that fixes this. The country will die before the morons celebrating this ruling realize their mistake.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:46 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Why didn't Trump put you on the court instead of Kav or ACB?
Because I'm not a judge.
shockingly, not a requirement
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:47 am to tigafan4life
quote:
So anchor babies is a go, still? That is so fricking dumb.
Yes it's dumb. We need a constitutional amendment. What will you do to support it? Bitch online?
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:47 am to lionward2014
quote:
"[n]o student-athlete on either side of the issue ... deserves to be ostracized or vilified."
Kavanaugh's quote to end his opinion. Absolutely going to cause heads on both sides to explode.
I do have some sympathy for the lonely, attention-starved kid who is being used for political ends by the hate-filled weirdos that make up today's Democrat Party. But I have none for the adults who allow this bullshite. They need to be held individually liable both civilly and criminally for every injury that results.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:47 am to kingbob
While I do agree unlimited no questions asked birthright citizenship can be a problem and is ripe with potential for abuse; legally this case is about as open and shut as possible. More plain and unambiguous language is scantly present in US constitutional law than this:
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.
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.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:47 am to gaetti15
quote:
shockingly, not a requirement
Well, I'm not an attorney either. Maybe that's not a requirement either, but I'd be shocked if anyone ever elevates someone who isn't an attorney to SCOTUS.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:48 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Because I'm not a judge.
You don't have to be.
You don't even have to have a law degree.
Matter of fact, there are no requirements at all.
Near as I can tell, you don't even have to be alive. There's no age requirement, so if you could get one confirmed, you could appoint an infant. Or a dead person. Or a fictional character.
You are as qualified according to the official Constitutional requirements as anyone else.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:48 am to lionward2014
Yes - that wa the only way you were going to get a majority to get any wiggle room, because a majority was not going to overturn Kim Ark (or whatever the case name is), even moreso on just a EO. But you could fit this idea into the Kim Ark case. No doubt that was why the EO was drafted the way it was as well.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:49 am to BrownLeft Shoe
quote:
While I do agree unlimited no questions asked birthright citizenship can be a problem and is ripe with potential for abuse; legally this case is about as open and shut as possible. More plain and unambiguous language is scantly present in US constitutional law than this:
You skipped over the most important part:
quote:
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof
SCOTUS didn't include the comma before this statement, thus changing the meaning.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:50 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
You don't have to be.
You don't even have to have a law degree.
Matter of fact, there are no requirements at all.
Near as I can tell, you don't even have to be alive. There's no age requirement, so if you could get one confirmed, you could appoint an infant. Or a dead person. Or a fictional character.
You are as qualified according to the official Constitutional requirements as anyone else.
That's actually pretty fantastic. Can't say I knew any of this. That said, I doubt we're going to see non-attorneys elevated to SCOTUS.
Posted on 6/30/26 at 9:51 am to RAB
quote:
It is the only time I've seen this particular group of justices become strict constructionists.
This is not true, they can look at the authors of the 14th amend. and see their intentions.
Trump can end this without the Supreme Court, all he has to do is use his Emergency Powers. As soon as he shows this is being used by foreign entities to try and overthrow our Gov. he can enact these powers and the SC have no ability to overcome these Emergency Powers.
These people are clowns. You know why we know the 14th Amendment did not mean what they say it means? Because the American Indians had to be made Citizens in the 1920s and given the right to vote, and you know why? Because they were noy "Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof"
Its a joke, and anyone who agrees with them are just being naive. This is really all about the court placating the rich who need cheap labor.
Page 4 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News