@law_of_the_wild: So, Donald didn't read the opinion, right? #birthrightcitizenhip #trump #scotus #usa #lawyer

Knightmare!!!!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 :

They’re gonna go through Congress to fix it because even the judges were agreed if it’s 5 to 4 means that the judges do agree with it

Ali_skiUtah :

Is this why Justice Thomas was seen visiting the senate recently?

Sweets :

It’s was only 5-4. It’s basically one bill away from getting overturned

blueteamlogic :

he focused on kavanaughs concurrence. you need to acknowledge that. he's still wrong, but there might be a path.

RedYellowOrangeGold :

The argument proponents use isn't that Congress can override the Constitution. It is that the Supreme Court has been misinterpreting the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” for 128 years. They believe that if Congress passes a law defining that phrase differently, it provides a 'vehicle' for a specific case and that forces the Supreme Court to look at the issue again. The goal is to get the Court to say, “Actually, we’ve been reading this wrong for a century so here is the new, originalist interpretation.” That is the strategy he is talking about …

VC :

There's not a word for how much I despise that rusted paper clip of a predator.

radical_jezebel :

I’m glad you were right but I wasn’t confident in that at all.

Siberio Khovonick :

Why u asked fhat question? He has never been OK.

M :

Maga is running with this too.

Jay :

you'll have to review one of the dissents (I think it was Aliito) He outlined the congressional method that Trump is saying they will work on. it will get challenged again of course but the opinion will be closer

Tau :

Expecting Trump to understand that is asking A LOT of him

Buff_Dickles :

Wild times we’re living in

Chad :

I would like to think he was referring to Congress starting the Amending process, but…

Misdo1 :

Does he understand constitutional amendments and the process

kkatz0522 :

Roger :

Uh no

GI_Gallifrey J :

No

DopeMonster :

trump thinks he is god

KassDoesCourts (MV) :

I’m pretty sure the they said it wasn’t constitutional 🤣 maybe he’s thinking cause they didn’t strike him on statutory grounds firmly enough? 🤣

hollandlaw2.0 :

No. He’s not ok. We’re not ok 🤦🏻‍♀️

erikamonroe375 :

They really tried to argue that they aren't subject to US jurisdiction, like our courts wouldn't be able to prosecute or deport them for anything. They really didn't think that through.

Fionarona222 :

Yayyy! Thanks for the good news! I just found out our Supreme Court isn't COMPLETELY corrupted...yet.

Nicole CRNA 💙 :

Except Kavanaugh said something to that effect.

RedYellowOrangeGold :

He’s not wrong…that’s what’s scary. Congress would have to pass a bill that claims the Constitution's words mean something different than what courts have decided for over 100 years, essentially forcing the Supreme Court to either agree with them or strike the law down as unconstitutional.

MisterE :

... so about that oath to uphold the constitution...