zeke5123a
5hr ago
If the argument that using foreigners and aliens is to clarify that children borne of diplomats who happen to be U.S. citizens as well, then that moves me not at all.
zeke5123a
6hr ago
It isn’t dispositive but it is instructive. That is, if the answer is “obvious” then how did the drafter understand it to mean something else? That is at least a clue that it isn’t obvious.
zeke5123a
6hr ago
Your construction makes no sense. First, the punctuation would be wrong. Second, describing diplomats as foreigners and aliens would be surplusage on top of surplusage.
zeke5123a
7hr ago
Re trans and sports.
Read this ESPN article. It is a lesson in how to editorialize a purported “straight” news story (no pun intended).
zeke5123a
7hr ago
And kavanaugh? Maybe that should make you pause and think perhaps your position isn’t air tight.
zeke5123a
7hr ago
This reminds me of Obamacare. Everyone was told “not a real issue” as the received wisdom was “clear” but when you actually look at the received wisdom it just isn’t clear.
zeke5123a
2d ago
Isn’t that part of the point? Mr. Bennett is a weak man who married the uncouth but gorgeous party girl. He made a bad choice but never had the spine to guide her to a better path.
zeke5123a
2d ago
Well, you are also missing the category where if you are an old grizzled cop you can revoke the immunity after shooting the criminal diplomat.
zeke5123a
3d ago
But the question is if an Indian was off the reservation and gave birth would the child be a US citizen? It is far from clear the answer was yes meaning it is entirely relevant to the question of birthright citizenship.
zeke5123a
3d ago
It isn’t obvious to me. Randy Barnett and Richard Epstein both have laid out strong reasoners why this wasn’t the case. Likewise, it wasn’t obvious to Dick Posner why constitutionally this was required.
The real question in my mind was whether the change to the civil rights act language was designed to grant birthright citizenship.
zeke5123a
3d ago
Lisa cook pretty clearly lied on her mortgage application. Sure she hasn’t been indicted but it doesn’t follow that the same burden of proof applies to a for cause firing.
It also seems clear she plagiarized. It would be interesting if Trump fired her for that on the basis that she was appointed in part for her academic “success” which is fraudulent.
zeke5123a
4d ago
I’m not sure you can describe the demise of Humphrey’s executor as “is this even the same constitution.”
First, the union got by for about 150 years prior to it. Second, the court has routinely cabined the scope of that ruling for years heavily narrowing its scope. Sure striking it will be meaningful but not earth shattering.
Sure but Roberts for unknown reasons reached the constitutional issue when he needed just statutory.
More options
Context Copy link