| Author | Message | ||
Naaistam Comedian Username: Naaistam Post Number: 1435 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 99.97.24.134 Rating: N/A |
The actual chances of success for each specific option are detailed below: 1. Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Chances: Effectively 0% The Barrier: Even if passed by Congress, this statutory text change directly violates the Trump v. Barbara constitutional ruling. Federal district courts would issue an immediate injunction, blocking it from taking effect. The Reality: A statute cannot override a Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution. Therefore, changing the text of the INA alone accomplishes nothing in practice. 2. Redefine "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof" via Statute Chances: Effectively 0% The Barrier: Congress does not have the authority to legislate the definition of constitutional terms. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion already explicitly defined "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to mean being subject to U.S. laws while on U.S. soil. The Reality: The Court holds the exclusive power of constitutional interpretation. Any attempt by Congress to redefine a constitutional phrase via standard legislation would be declared unconstitutional almost instantly. 3. Establish a New Citizenship Verification Framework Chances: Low to Moderate (but only at the state level as a legal challenge) The Barrier: If Republican-led states or a federal agency attempted to unilaterally implement these parental status checks, they would face immediate lawsuits from civil rights groups for violating the 14th Amendment. The Reality: This option is highly likely to be attempted by conservative states trying to force a new legal showdown. However, the administrative framework would be quickly blocked by courts before it could be fully enforced. 4. Overcoming the High Legal Hurdle Chances: Near Zero in the Near Term (10–20% over the next decade) The Barrier: For this to succeed, a future Supreme Court would have to explicitly overturn its own fresh precedent—a direct violation of stare decisis (the legal principle of respecting prior decisions). The Reality: The Court rarely flips a massive, landmark precedent within a few years of deciding it. For this hurdle to be cleared, multiple members of the current 6-justice majority would need to be replaced by staunchly conservative, anti-birthright citizenship justices, a process that takes many years of presidential appointments. - Stalker - 'S'traight talker - Speak the truth, even if your voice shakes | ||
Naaistam Comedian Username: Naaistam Post Number: 1434 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 99.97.24.134 Rating: N/A |
Following Justice Kavanaugh’s legal reasoning, Congress could achieve this by taking the following specific steps: 1. Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA): Congress would introduce and pass a bill amending Title 8, Section 1401(a) of the U.S. Code. The Current Text: The law currently states that any person "born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a citizen at birth. The Legislative Revision: Congress would add explicit statutory exceptions. For example, the text could be amended to state: "excepting children born to parents who are not lawful permanent residents, citizens, or nationals of the United States at the time of birth." 2. Redefine "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof" via Statute: Because the Supreme Court's majority opinion anchored its decision in the Constitution, any statutory change by Congress would immediately spark a new constitutional crisis. However, to bypass a constitutional amendment, Congress would use its legislative authority to legally define the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" within federal law. Narrowing the Scope: The statute would explicitly declare that under federal immigration law, a person is only "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. if their parents possess a legal, permanent domicile or allegiance to the United States. Excluding Specific Groups: This statutory definition would legally exclude the children of undocumented immigrants, tourists, and temporary visa holders from automatic citizenship. 3. Establish a New Citizenship Verification Framework: To enforce the restriction, the legislation would mandate a new administrative process for issuing birth certificates and proof of citizenship. Parental Status Checks: State vital statistics offices and federal agencies would be legally required to verify the legal immigration status of at least one parent before recognizing a newborn child as a U.S. citizen at birth. Alternative Status Registry: The law would create a secondary legal status (such as a temporary resident or national status) for children born on U.S. soil who no longer qualify for automatic citizenship. 4. Overcoming the High Legal Hurdle: For this legislative pathway to actually succeed, a future Supreme Court would have to fully adopt Justice Kavanaugh's view over the current majority's constitutional view. If Congress passed this law today, it would be immediately blocked by federal courts under the Trump v. Barbara precedent. To become permanent law, the case would have to travel back up to the Supreme Court, where a newly configured conservative majority would need to officially overturn Chief Justice Roberts’ constitutional ruling and declare that birthright citizenship is purely a matter of congressional statute, not constitutional right. - Stalker - 'S'traight talker - Speak the truth, even if your voice shakes | ||
Hawkeye Moderator Username: Hawkeye Post Number: 3576 Registered: 04-2015 Rating: |
it should be unanimous ... it's about if it is inscribed in the constitution or not? if 4 saying that it is not, that is a concern! | ||
Naaistam Comedian Username: Naaistam Post Number: 1433 Registered: 03-2014 Posted From: 99.97.24.134 Rating: N/A |
6-3 kada expected - Stalker - 'S'traight talker - Speak the truth, even if your voice shakes | ||
Hawkeye Moderator Username: Hawkeye Post Number: 3575 Registered: 04-2015 Rating: N/A |
this is supposed to be 9-0, right? | ||
Hawkeye Moderator Username: Hawkeye Post Number: 3574 Registered: 04-2015 Rating: N/A |
5-4 is alarming, no? | ||
Time_pass Hero Username: Time_pass Post Number: 12659 Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 136.174.187.5 Rating: N/A |
mari mana Bible batch emi povali | ||
New_user Megastar Username: New_user Post Number: 22984 Registered: 10-2014 Posted From: 104.201.78.190 Rating: N/A |
Expected decision. | ||
Emc2 Legend Username: Emc2 Post Number: 79315 Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 71.120.25.244 Rating: N/A |
https://apnews.com/live/birthright-citizenship-decision-supr eme-court-updates-06-30-2026 11 |
