- 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
re: Supreme Court Live re Birthright Citizenship and Nationwide Injunctions
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:08 am to IvoryBillMatt
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:08 am to IvoryBillMatt
CORRECTION: She is not from some unknown think tank. She is from Georgetown. DC loves Georgetown and Roberts probably sees her at the cocktail parties.
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/news/icap-names-kelsi-brown-corkran-as-supreme-court-director/
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/news/icap-names-kelsi-brown-corkran-as-supreme-court-director/
0
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:14 am to IvoryBillMatt
The Leftist justices are much more active in helping the attorneys on "their" side.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:15 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
They are not getting rid of birthright citizenship. That would be a level of judicial activism that any serious conservative would be horrified to see. The solution here is to amend the constitution. If the votes are not there, then they are not there.
The question is should birthright citizenship apply to a person born here if the parents were here illegally. There’s an argument that it shouldn’t apply because it’s a loophole that’s being abused. A woman pregnant 9 months in Mexico shouldn’t be able to hop the border and spit a baby out and it be a U.S. citizen automatically.
Birthright citizenship should only apply to babies born of parents who are here legally whether that’s on a work visa, legit refugee program, or even on vacation here as long as they were admitted to the country legally
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:20 am to IvoryBillMatt
I don't think there is any way they link these 2 issues in 1 opinion - thankfully there is a conservative leaning majority that I believe will split the issues here - each issue needs its own decision - they are too important to tie together in one opinion
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:24 am to htowntyger
I definitely do not see them ending birthright citizenship or completely stopping nationwide injunctions but I do think they will try to clarify the role of them in the future
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:29 am to Floating Change Up
quote:
Holy fricksticks that woman is dumb as dirt.
She was put there not as a bright legal mind but rather a DEI pick that was to be a rubber stamp for the democrats on any issue
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:31 am to Rip Torn
Y’all better apologize to Jake when they keep birthright citizenship.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:33 am to deltaland
quote:
or even on vacation here as long as they were admitted to the country legally
No to that. You don't get to vacation here to get a foothold in this country.
One of your parents needs to be a citizen or going through the process and has been here 10 yrs or more.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:33 am to Rip Torn
KBJ is the epitome of the person that KNOWS she is way over her head but continues to fight it and speak up loudly in the room to make people believe she's smart.
Hypothetical Lawyer: Should someone fleeing the police on foot be subject to tasers?
KBJ: What I find it interesting, and compelling enough that it should be explored, should the police be allowed to wear footwear that improves their ability to run faster, or should they be forced to wear footwear that purposely slows them down. A sound argument could be made in the future that "innocent until proven guilty" should be expanded to "free until captured" and the police should not be given an advantage in the pursuit of capture.
Hypothetical Lawyer: Should someone fleeing the police on foot be subject to tasers?
KBJ: What I find it interesting, and compelling enough that it should be explored, should the police be allowed to wear footwear that improves their ability to run faster, or should they be forced to wear footwear that purposely slows them down. A sound argument could be made in the future that "innocent until proven guilty" should be expanded to "free until captured" and the police should not be given an advantage in the pursuit of capture.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:36 am to boosiebadazz
Of course they are keeping it, never claimed they weren’t
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:46 am to Rip Torn
I can see them tackling injunctions here - roberts asked plaintiff's attorney how many times do we (USSC) have to tell them (district judges) how to handle injunctions - very telling comment imo - I think they will at a minimum seriously hamstring that process awaiting legislation. I think they'll punt on citizenship and force it to be its own case.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:49 am to htowntyger
quote:
I can see them tackling injunctions here - roberts asked plaintiff's attorney how many times do we (USSC) have to tell them (district judges) how to handle injunctions - very telling comment imo - I think they will at a minimum seriously hamstring that process awaiting legislation. I think they'll punt on citizenship and force it to be its own case.
I think you may be seeing a hint as to the rationale of why they took this case.
It didn't make sense to me at first, but realize you have to firmly entrench yourself in the mindset of Roberts to understand.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 11:51 am to Y.A. Tittle
Coney Barrett Grills Trump Official On If Admin Will Obey Court Decisions
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/amy-coney-barrett-grills-trump-solicitor-general-on-whether-or-not-the-administration-will-obey-court-decisions/?cfp
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/amy-coney-barrett-grills-trump-solicitor-general-on-whether-or-not-the-administration-will-obey-court-decisions/?cfp
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:02 pm to htowntyger
Agree all the way around. Unfortunately, from the questions and the tones of the attorneys, I think nationwide injunctions from district court judges will survive.
We will see about birthright citizenship...although I don't think that will be a win for the Trump Administration either.
We will see about birthright citizenship...although I don't think that will be a win for the Trump Administration either.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:16 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
I think you may be seeing a hint as to the rationale of why they took this case.
Kagan also mentioned how favorable venues were being sought out to issue the injunctions. She mentioned that during Trump’s first term the venue was primarily San Francisco while during Biden’s tenure it was Texas.. They are fully aware of the games being played. It also speaks to the impartiality of the courts if you know a particular venue is in your favor before the merits of the case are even heard.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:19 pm to LSUSUPERSTAR
quote:
You don't get to vacation here to get a foothold in this country
Birth tourism, particularly from the Chinese, is a thing.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:22 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Y’all better apologize to Jake when they keep birthright citizenship.
The few clips I’ve heard…this isn’t going well for the admin (fyi, I agree with their position)
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:26 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
Kagan also mentioned how favorable venues were being sought out to issue the injunctions
That’s interesting coming from her. Anytime a liberal justice says “both sides are doing it” is not good for the liberal argument.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 12:36 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
The USSS will be the President.
Only if a weak president cedes executive powers by obeying. Their lack of restraint/power grab created this crisis.
Page 3 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News