Quote:
Originally Posted by Lathum
Call me crazy but i prefer the president uphold the oath he takes to defend the constitution, not change it or circumvent it based on partisan politics.
|
From prior SCOTUS discussions in FOFC and their approach to pragmatism vs textualism vs etc., I infer that most of us believe the constitution is a living document and subject/adapt to different interpretations over time.
So, if Trump wants to challenge birthright now and not continue an interpretation from an 1898 ruling, I say go for it. And this hold true for anything else in the constitution, including 2A.
Quote:
|
1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which clarified that children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents are citizens, regardless of their parents' immigration status.
|