US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Ostatnio edytowane przez moderatora:
I'd prefer she won, but she's still a consistent pain in the ass.
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive and this doesn't change that.
she also killed the ACA repeal in 2017. Guess who else did? Murkowski. and John McCain.
So idk. She also tried to block ACB's nomination (which is funny in hindsight).
 
How is that a bet, Nigga Frieza is literally his most powerful form.
Okay so maybe I just want an excuse to use like, a frieza drinking purple drank to celebrate the return of the Moro arc. Is that too much to ask?

Speaking of this sarah person, these people are SO CLOSE to getting it. They almost understand.
1782768756678.png
 
Wyświetl załącznik 9209417
Voters are already moving on from Iran and it isn't even July yet.
Doomers owe me a massive apology, I told them this shit wouldn't affect midterms. Voters have memory retention on-par with a brain damaged goldfish with ADHD. They have to keep harping on trump as being a nazi so frequently and constantly BECAUSE they know that people barely have the capacity to remember this kind of thing at all.
 
Either way, they know there's going to massive seething. Possible riots and violent action by either side.

By delaying til the last possible second, they minimize this. Many people are going on a 3-4 day weekend if not on vacation all week. Lots of news coverage of the 250th and July 4th. Releasing it Tuesday gives only a day or two of bouncing and squeaking by the losing side before we hit the long weekend and the news cycle moves on. So they hope.

One thing I wonder: Is there any third option for the SC to kick the can down the road? Maybe punt to a lower court, do anything to keep things at status quo til Congress changes the law? Or is it a pure Constitutional question at this point where they must decide once and for all if the 14 Amendment is for slaves only and if Congress wants Magic Dirt they need a new law or Amendment?

I think one thing that precludes a ruling in Trump's favor is the Amendment writer's intent. They could have simply passed laws in 1868 giving former slaves citizenship, codifying representation, and tidying up Civil War debts and denying former CSA officers and officials the right to hold office (which was never enforced at all).

But they made an Amendment to the Constitution, which is a Big Deal. If the SC strikes down Birthright Citizenship, it basically renders an entire Amendment superfluous. So it could be argued that the writers of them Amendment really wanted to codify Magic Dirt.
The Wong Kim Ark decision (and iirc (maybe) the dissent) includes a fair amount of background information about the circumstances/ decisions/ legislative history/ thought processes around 14A. And that made clear that 14A birthright was not just for former slaves, regardless of the instigation for it. .

The basic thing is that general birthright citizenship is enshrined in plain language in the 14th Amendment (legislative) and roundly confirmed in Supreme Court precedent (judicial). Observation, not position. Trump (executive) aimed to override precedent or send up a balloon via EO, but checks and balances. Massive illegal and strategic immigration wasn't a thing in the 19th century, and was surely not foreseen on the scale it exists today. But from a judicial interpretation standpoint, it's hard to get to a non-political way to interpret 14A, as it is written, as other than meaning birthright citizenship. The answer to changing the law is legislative, not judicial nor executive. This is a political question, and so change needs to come from the legislative branch.

Sauer argued for a “permanent domicile and residence” in the United States requirement, which, per argument, is impossible for illegals and others (visas, tourists, etc.). But that is really a practical shift based on inference and "times have changed," not a jurisprudentially supported approach. Some justices also focused questions on practical administration. Wouldn't be surprised to see multiple concurrences.

Semi-quant-based analysis of the questioning and what each justice focused on.
 
Doomers owe me a massive apology, I told them this shit wouldn't affect midterms. Voters have memory retention on-par with a brain damaged goldfish with ADHD. They have to keep harping on trump as being a nazi so frequently and constantly BECAUSE they know that people barely have the capacity to remember this kind of thing at all.
Voters have attention span of a child. If Kamala went to TV and talked about how she had this genius plan cooked up by expertsTM to fix economy she probably would have won, that's how dire it is. Trump should try that.
1000004253.jpg
Frankly it's good to see republicians push against Tucker. There is no reason to give him benefit of doubt anymore. He's an Islamic propagandaist now.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole