General Discussion

LymphocyteLover

(8,332 posts)

23. Exactly-- it's fucking disgraceful, disgusting, depressiing, evil, etc

Reply to edhopper (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 27, 2025, 02:03 PM

Jun 27

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

JustAnotherGen Shipwack edhopper CrispyQ

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Yes, they did rule on Birtright Citizenship [View all] edhopper Jun 27 OP

They are going to build gulags by the dozens. rubbersole Jun 27 #1

The Court gave 30 days to seek relief in other jurisdictions Sympthsical Jun 27 #2

And a Constitutional Right edhopper Jun 27 #4

Exactly-- it's fucking disgraceful, disgusting, depressiing, evil, etc LymphocyteLover Jun 27 #23

Potentially, that sets up an internal migration wave NickB79 Jun 27 #48

I think people misunderstand the executive order Sympthsical Jun 27 #57

I was thinking more along the lines of parents moving to protect their children NickB79 Jun 28 #60

Oh sure, absolutely Sympthsical Jun 28 #61

it's bullshit though!!! LymphocyteLover Jun 27 #54

There's one positive angle, though. It discourages forum-shopping for judges like Kacsmaryk Ocelot II Jun 27 #3

Only if you apply logic and precedent newdeal2 Jun 27 #5

You know way more about legal stuff than I so I defer to your wisdom as always, but I have to wonder AZJonnie Jun 27 #6

Thats correct, anytime theres a dispute between rulings, Volaris Jun 27 #7

Thomas has already said he wants to do that. Ocelot II Jun 27 #8

Oh, well see Loving is different. The principal is the same yes, Volaris Jun 27 #26

IANAL, but does this apply retroactively to other nationwide injunctions Arazi Jun 27 #18

This means Trump has an even tighter grip on John Roberts Attilatheblond Jun 27 #9

Eek! Wonder how this will apply to adoptions? Arazi Jun 27 #19

As things are going at present, have to consider it will be wielded like a weapon Attilatheblond Jun 27 #27

He adopted a boy and a girl Celerity Jun 27 #20

Irish woman adopeted the kids, as required by Irish law at the time. Then she took them to South American country Attilatheblond Jun 27 #28

District courts can still pass lkmited injunctions for specific cases. SSJVegeta Jun 27 #10

Constitutional rights edhopper Jun 27 #11

Well, they're more like regional privileges now 0rganism Jun 27 #12

Ya.. SSJVegeta Jun 27 #13

Ya SSJVegeta Jun 27 #14

It is a stunning new power they gave to Trump now Johnny2X2X Jun 27 #15

Thinking it's time to park the smart phone and only carry a dumb phone if necessary Attilatheblond Jun 27 #29

NO. Read the executive order. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #33

I think the six conservatives mountain grammy Jun 27 #16

I expect red states like mine will take every inch of this rope 2 Meow Momma Jun 27 #17

You are right in your thinking. edhopper Jun 27 #21

You aren't wrong JustAnotherGen Jun 27 #25

My parents immigrated to the U.S. in 1949 Wicked Blue Jun 27 #22

were they undocumented or have temporary VISA status when you were born? LymphocyteLover Jun 27 #24

This will not impact your son. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #32

No, they were legal, but with this evil crew in charge Wicked Blue Jun 27 #38

yes, that is my great fear LymphocyteLover Jun 27 #52

No. Not unless you were born February 19 or later this year - Ms. Toad Jun 27 #31

No. They did not. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #30

You are naive to think so edhopper Jun 27 #34

That had nothing to do with the executive order on birthright citizenship, or the court's decision. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #35

My claim is that edhopper Jun 27 #36

Wrong. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #40

They said going forward edhopper Jun 27 #41

Correct. Which is why it makes it much harder and expensive to fight him going forward. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #43

Because after this ruling edhopper Jun 27 #44

Extremely unlikely. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #46

Like anybody ICE deems illegal edhopper Jun 27 #47

That's not careful legal strategy from the Project 25 folks. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #51

Doesn't matter does it edhopper Jun 27 #53

It may well be - or at least the birthright citizenship narrowly interpreted. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #56

I am sorry edhopper Jun 27 #49

I don't believe you've heard anything unrealistic about what he or the courts would do from me. Ms. Toad Jun 27 #55

No, not from you edhopper Jun 27 #58

Ms Toad, you clearly are unaware that the role of the judiciary Seeking Serenity Jun 27 #39

Thanks OC375 Jun 27 #59

A couple of Class Action lawsuits have already been filed to get around this ruling LetMyPeopleVote Jun 27 #37

SCOTUS still has to rule on these edhopper Jun 27 #42

And how far back do you have to go? Bettie Jun 27 #45

Playing the long game, going beyond the foreseeable future... Efilroft Sul Jun 27 #50

They didn't specifically answer the underlying question - birthright citizenship karynnj Jun 28 #62