• just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    23 hours ago

    That would hold either, because it would mean that ANY visitor, legal or not, is not subject to any federal laws at all. Not just constitutional…ANY. If that’s their aim, then free for all on Trump and his team.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      In 1898, some Justices argued that it excluded people that had citizenship to another jurisdiction… So it has happened, and this SCOTUS doesn’t mind overturning precedent one bit.

          • just_another_person@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            And reading the subsequent interpretations and judgements, it continuously applies the broader language of the 14th as it is intended. SCROTUS is going to have to argue that any and all previous case law related to any of these is wrong, and that’s going to open up a can of worms for any other judgements that resulted. That’s like saying that a law goes into effect that retroactively ignores all other previous laws related, and everything since this particular case is wrong, and they all need to be revisited. Not gonna happen.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              I mean, they discarded decades of settled law over abortion, they certainly have it in them…