Kavanaugh was speaking to his belief that birthright citizenship was settled as a matter of law, and as a result, it could be overturned through legislation. But that's the view of a partial dissent. With this majority opinion, it's still a constitutional right until it's overturned or amended.
How but by constitutional amendment can it be overturned? We’ve seen how a law enacted by Congress can be overturned by SCOTUS (The Voting Rights Act), but how can this constitutional amendment be overturned except by the Ammendment process?
Relating to Alito's response to the Birthright case it should be noted that if his past writings are scrutinized it would show that yesterday as in the past when he has no true understanding of the law he drums up his "what if" conclusions and makes up ridiculous examples to cite his stance. He has, I am convinced, the weakest understanding of history and law.
Voting against the 14th Amendment should disqualify any SCOTUS justice. Period.
Great to wake up to good news.
Decision is too shaky to be sanguine about it. Kavanough gave them a way out.
Kavanaugh was outvoted, and so they still need to pass another constitutional amendment if they want to overturn birthright citizenship.
Didn't Kavanaugh suggest that they could use immigration legislation to achieve the same outcome?
Kavanaugh was speaking to his belief that birthright citizenship was settled as a matter of law, and as a result, it could be overturned through legislation. But that's the view of a partial dissent. With this majority opinion, it's still a constitutional right until it's overturned or amended.
Thx for the clarification Adam
How but by constitutional amendment can it be overturned? We’ve seen how a law enacted by Congress can be overturned by SCOTUS (The Voting Rights Act), but how can this constitutional amendment be overturned except by the Ammendment process?
Why did they take this case? Seems like a Heritage Foundation Stepping Stone for future Arguments! Scary stuff.
Illuminating conversation. Thank you both!
Relating to Alito's response to the Birthright case it should be noted that if his past writings are scrutinized it would show that yesterday as in the past when he has no true understanding of the law he drums up his "what if" conclusions and makes up ridiculous examples to cite his stance. He has, I am convinced, the weakest understanding of history and law.
Yessss