- 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 7/1/26 at 8:11 am to the808bass
quote:
You’re pretending that there’s not a comma.
Apposition: “In grammar, a relationship where two nouns are placed side by side so that the second phrase identifies, renames, or explains the first. The second noun is called an appositive.”
The punctuation uses asyndetic coordination (omitting “and”) between “foreigners” and “aliens.” In the 19th century, commas were frequently used to chain descriptive relative modifiers together without explicit conjunctions, creating a cumulative restriction on the word “persons.”
Today, we would typically use parentheses () in this manner rather than commas.
You’re welcome for the free lesson.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 8:19 am to stout
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.quote:
Texans deserve action, not just rhetoric, from their state leaders. Texas must start acting like the sovereign state it is and stop taking it on the chin when actions from DC threaten to destroy the very fabric of our republic. Texas must not simply act like a powerless bystander but take bold and decisive action to protect liberty for future generations.
I am publicly demanding an immediate special session to combat the harms from mass birth tourism, pressure the federal government to fix birth tourism, and to protect the value of citizenship that countless paid the ultimate price for. I hope every elected Republican in Texas joins my call for immediate action. Delay is unacceptable for a state like Texas!
Texas should pass the following IMMEDIATELY in a special session:
· Make it a felony to operate or participate in birth tourism within our borders
· Expand criminal offense of illegal entry to include entering for purposes of birth tourism
· Stop issuing birth certificates to children of non-citizens
· Give the Attorney General authority to investigate and prosecute birth tourism
· Ban preplanned adoption agreements and gestational surrogacy contracts if any party involved is a citizen or resident of a country of concern (as Florida has already done)
· Pass a resolution formally condemning the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara
· Pass a resolution formally demanding the U.S. Congress take any and all necessary actions to fix birthright citizenship
Posted on 7/1/26 at 8:23 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Mickey Goldmill
Pedantic is an insulting word used to describe someone who annoys others by correcting small errors, caring too much about minor details, or emphasizing their own expertise especially in some narrow or boring subject matter.
I assumed your post was from the dipshit "lawyer" before I noticed it wasn't/
Posted on 7/1/26 at 8:24 am to Ailsa
quote:
Make it a felony to operate or participate in birth tourism within our borders
· Expand criminal offense of illegal entry to include entering for purposes of birth tourism
· Give the Attorney General authority to investigate and prosecute birth tourism
· Ban preplanned adoption agreements and gestational surrogacy contracts if any party involved is a citizen or resident of a country of concern (as Florida has already done)
· Pass a resolution formally demanding the U.S. Congress take any and all necessary actions to fix birthright citizenship
All these are good and (probably) legal
quote:
· Stop issuing birth certificates to children of non-citizens
This would get struck down with the quickness
Posted on 7/1/26 at 8:32 am to Indefatigable
Read through the threads. Some do believe that.
Sure, it is what was written down. Commas and everything.
Ambassadors and Native Americans are excluded bc they are beholden to foreign nations, but all others are ok? that's not exactly linear logic.
Do you ignore the comma in the 2nd Amendment and think it guns are only for a militia?
Sure, it is what was written down. Commas and everything.
Ambassadors and Native Americans are excluded bc they are beholden to foreign nations, but all others are ok? that's not exactly linear logic.
Do you ignore the comma in the 2nd Amendment and think it guns are only for a militia?
Posted on 7/1/26 at 10:35 am to AC1221
quote:
Read through the threads. Some do believe that.
Sure, it is what was written down. Commas and everything.
Ambassadors and Native Americans are excluded bc they are beholden to foreign nations, but all others are ok? that's not exactly linear logic.
Do you ignore the comma in the 2nd Amendment and think it guns are only for a militia?
If your interpretation comes down to arguing on the effect of the comma in a sentence, the sentence is poorly written/out of date and needs to be clarified.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 10:51 am to Indefatigable
If you mean "ignoring grammar", just say that.
Just like you kids also ignore "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
How can someone be under the jurisdiction of the US is we don't even know they're here?
But, yes, many things written hundreds of years ago were apparently poorly written for today's understanding. Grammar included.
I encourage you to read Robert's opinion on the ruling, then read Thomas's dissent. Alito's was also well written.
Just like you kids also ignore "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
How can someone be under the jurisdiction of the US is we don't even know they're here?
But, yes, many things written hundreds of years ago were apparently poorly written for today's understanding. Grammar included.
I encourage you to read Robert's opinion on the ruling, then read Thomas's dissent. Alito's was also well written.
This post was edited on 7/1/26 at 10:56 am
Posted on 7/1/26 at 10:54 am to AC1221
quote:
If you mean "ignoring grammar", just say that.
I'm not. I am saying that the use of various forms of punctuation has changed since the 1860's and it lends itself to varying interpretations--evidenced by the Supreme Court having to parse through said interpretations.
quote:
Just like you kids also ignore "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof
No one is ignoring it. I am telling you, and it should be self-evident, that the meaning of the phrase is no longer as clear as it was at the time it was drafted. That isn't a design flaw--its the reality of existing for a long time.
quote:
How can someone be under the jurisdiction of the US is we don't even know they're here?
If an illegal is arrested, are they not subject to the jurisdiction of the State and/or federal government?
quote:
But, yes, many things written hundreds of years ago were apparently poorly written for today's understanding. Grammar included.
That would be why Congress should actually work on doing things that matter instead of whatever meaningless resolution they'll pass next.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 11:35 am to Indefatigable
So, everything should be rewritten using modern phrasing? Or should we send everyone to Zoolander's Center for kids Who Can't Read Good?
You must be a big fan of KBJ's opinions. the ones with "full stop" and "got the assignment."
Under the jurisdiction of the US means being fully under the law (including following the law in coming to the US. Green cards, Visa's, etc) and OWING ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES.
That is why native americans and ambassadors were excluded. Because they owe their allegiance elsewhere. Anyone coming here illegally is doing so by nefarious means and reasons, and are not allegiant to the US.
And your last part is why this ruling was so important. We all know Congress isn't going to do jack. and even if they did, no way there would ever be enough votes for a Constitutional amendment.
You must be a big fan of KBJ's opinions. the ones with "full stop" and "got the assignment."
Under the jurisdiction of the US means being fully under the law (including following the law in coming to the US. Green cards, Visa's, etc) and OWING ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES.
That is why native americans and ambassadors were excluded. Because they owe their allegiance elsewhere. Anyone coming here illegally is doing so by nefarious means and reasons, and are not allegiant to the US.
And your last part is why this ruling was so important. We all know Congress isn't going to do jack. and even if they did, no way there would ever be enough votes for a Constitutional amendment.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 11:52 am to Mickey Goldmill
Did you just read 19th century comma usage into our modern reading of the text?
Is that textual or original?
Is that textual or original?
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:04 pm to stout
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.quote:
Today, we woke up and knew the birthright citizenship case would be a win for the Left…because there were zero fences up.
The Court knows who the party of violence is in America
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:06 pm to stout
Did a bunch of Chinese people get their citizenship on the West coast when the 14th amendment passed?
They did not. They weren’t viewed as “subject to the jurisdiction” until Wong Kim Ark.
Furthermore, the Slaughterhouse Case decision from SCOTUS in 1873 agreed that “subject to the jurisdiction” was intended to exclude the children of citizens and subject of foreign states born within the United States from birthright citizenship. Wong Kim Ark dismissed this as a passing remark.
They did not. They weren’t viewed as “subject to the jurisdiction” until Wong Kim Ark.
Furthermore, the Slaughterhouse Case decision from SCOTUS in 1873 agreed that “subject to the jurisdiction” was intended to exclude the children of citizens and subject of foreign states born within the United States from birthright citizenship. Wong Kim Ark dismissed this as a passing remark.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:48 pm to AC1221
quote:
So, everything should be rewritten using modern phrasing
Everything? No. But when we come across phrasing that has either lost its meaning or now lends itself to varying interpretations, clarification is in order.
Oscillation driven by prevailing political winds and changing legal theories over time is NOT sustainable or the way the system was designed.
quote:
We all know Congress isn't going to do jack. and even if they did, no way there would ever be enough votes for a Constitutional amendment.
That isn’t the Court’s fault. It’s the voters’ fault.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:52 pm to Indefatigable
Wong Kim Ark is the court’s fault.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:53 pm to the808bass
quote:
Wong Kim Ark is the court’s fault.
Perhaps. Want to know how you undo or change judicial outcomes you disagree with? Particularly when it’s clear that they are not going to change with the current language?
You change the law.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:54 pm to Indefatigable
“Build your own Internet!”
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:55 pm to the808bass
quote:
Build your own Internet!
Not remotely the same thing. And you know that.
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:55 pm to the808bass
"Learn to code!"
Posted on 7/1/26 at 12:55 pm to BoarEd
quote:
Learn to code!
More like “vote for people in Congress who will advance this issue”
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News