deuce-ish

deuce-ish
[ deuce-ish ]

Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 12:57:41
weiner sleeve

Ouch!

https://reason.com/volokh/2025/06/27/justice-barrett-on-justice-jackson-in-trump-v-casa/?fbclid=IwY2xjawLLug5leHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETE2dlZzYzhpNHVkd0FKdERjAR5AbpM1voxfDsMTVP8cjmV8dbJF7--mJh10j0Ad9IC8KwWpJE9l4R31FlUjsQ_aem_eNjxhxShjfTr_ZxOe0UiVA

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Even Sotomayor tells JGB that she's out of her league.

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 8, 2025, 18:09:03, in reply to "Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion."

https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1942682645567267039

She needs to resign.

This isn’t the Minority Report movie - you must actually do something

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 8, 2025, 21:50:24, in reply to "Even Sotomayor tells JGB that she's out of her league. "

With very rare exceptions, the defendant must actually have done something that allegedly violates a criminal statute or allegedly done something subject to civil action.

Not preemptive strikes. You need an actual plaintiff who has allegedly been harmed and seeks relief.

Previous Message

https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1942682645567267039

She needs to resign.

she’d fuck up picking cotton*

Posted by Superman <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Superman' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 8, 2025, 18:32:35, in reply to "Even Sotomayor tells JGB that she's out of her league. "

Previous Message

https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1942682645567267039

She needs to resign.

MAGA
#blackfatigue

F ATL

Trump will still eventually lose on birthright citizenship

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 10:08:57, in reply to "Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion."

Based on some comments I read, some people think that this settled the underlying case that was not before the court. It will come back eventually, mostly likely pretty soon, as citizenship is not the kind of thing that should vary by state of residence.

They should declare that the constitution means when your born here

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 11:10:08, in reply to "Trump will still eventually lose on birthright citizenship"

To parents who are here legally. And was never intended for those who would sneak into the country. It’s common sense. The founders would have been aghast to think the British could sneak onto land have kids and then were granted citizenship.

That’s not how it worked then or how the text reads*

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 13:14:52, in reply to "They should declare that the constitution means when your born here"

Previous Message

I don’t think that’s a fair reading

Posted by DouchieHowser <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=DouchieHowser' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2025, 13:59:05, in reply to "That’s not how it worked then or how the text reads*"

Unless the term subject to the jurisdiction was previously interpreted to apply to non-citizens. Will be interesting to read the decision. Certainly comments by one of the drafters indicated it was intended to apply to free slaves.

This was interesting.

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 20:22:34, in reply to "That’s not how it worked then or how the text reads*"

https://x.com/gop_is_gutless/status/1939045908869488755

The notion that birthright citizenship is unquestionably mandated by the 14th Amendment is . . .

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 29, 2025, 1:32:49, in reply to "This was interesting. "
weiner sleeve

. . . patently ridiculous.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Reminds me of people fervently arguing the Second Amendment only applied to militias*

Posted by DouchieHowser <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=DouchieHowser' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2025, 14:00:56, in reply to "The notion that birthright citizenship is unquestionably mandated by the 14th Amendment is . . ."

Previous Message

. . . patently ridiculous.

Which makes no sense whatsoever, per the black letter of the amendment.*

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2025, 14:13:02, in reply to "Reminds me of people fervently arguing the Second Amendment only applied to militias*"
weiner sleeve

Previous Message

. . . patently ridiculous.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Disagree. It was never intended for illegal aliens. There’s case law to prove this

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 13:56:03, in reply to "That’s not how it worked then or how the text reads*"

Native Americans born in the US weren’t citizens until 1920 or something

Maybe one of our lawtalkers can conjure an argument

Posted by kokomojo <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=kokomojo' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 12:34:51, in reply to "They should declare that the constitution means when your born here"

Aren’t there cases or situations where some action is negated while in the act of committing a crime?
Looking for a parallel.
I guess the counter would be that even if the parents were breaking the law, the kid born here had no criminal intent, and by virtue of the wording of the Constitution is now native born, so entitled to all rights of citizenship

maybe you'd count committing an act of war as a suitable crime

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 20:37:52, in reply to "Maybe one of our lawtalkers can conjure an argument "

If you are present on American soil because of a war, and have a child, that child is not a citizen by birth. Perhaps in America for terrorism purposes would qualify, and I suppose there is a retroactive action possible.

Example: you are a foreign national in the US, accused of committing a terrorist attack. While here awaiting trial, you and a foreign mother give birth. You are convicted of a war-like action against the United States. I assume your child *could* lose its citizenship. I doubt that has been tested.

The founders would be aghast at a ton of things. They weren’t infallible men. *

Posted by haighter <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=haighter' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 12:29:10, in reply to "They should declare that the constitution means when your born here"
Boo Haighter

Previous Message

They owned slaves. What’s your point?*

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 28, 2025, 12:37:14, in reply to "The founders would be aghast at a ton of things. They weren’t infallible men. *"

Previous Message

She was appointed via auto-pen. Let’s take her off the court.

Posted by DouchieHowser <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=DouchieHowser' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 20:24:28, in reply to "Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion."

The scary thing is that she perfectly encapsulates the people driving the Democratic Party.

God damn. What a smackdown. Of course Jackson is the least qualified Justice in history

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 13:23:30, in reply to "Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion."

and that says a lot because she broke the record of the previous two record holders that she sits next to.

Really want Alito/Thomas to resign under Trump: then he picks dam near anyone.

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 16:25:24, in reply to "God damn. What a smackdown. Of course Jackson is the least qualified Justice in history "

Small Claims Court pinhead proved there's no requirements at all anymore. I'd go even younger than her with the replacements for the above-named two.

Alito/Thomas are both over 75; Wise Latina is 71, John Roberts at 70, Kagan is 65 and the rest 60 or younger.

Ya put some utter imbecile on the Supreme Court for absolutely no other reason than "minority woman"?? Don't complain about ANYONE else. All bets are off from now on.

Okay, rant over.

2 more like ACB I could get on board with instead of those 2 clowns*

Posted by JeffFrank <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=JeffFrank' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 16:56:38, in reply to "Really want Alito/Thomas to resign under Trump: then he picks dam near anyone."
Ish Cookoff Champion 2016

Previous Message

Small Claims Court pinhead proved there's no requirements at all anymore. I'd go even younger than her with the replacements for the above-named two.

Alito/Thomas are both over 75; Wise Latina is 71, John Roberts at 70, Kagan is 65 and the rest 60 or younger.

Ya put some utter imbecile on the Supreme Court for absolutely no other reason than "minority woman"?? Don't complain about ANYONE else. All bets are off from now on.

Okay, rant over.

Illiniphil is a mindless robot

Indeed*

Posted by Learning_and_Labor <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Learning_and_Labor' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2025, 13:21:13, in reply to "Wow. I cannot recall the last time a Supreme Court Justice called out a colleague in this fashion."

Previous Message

« Back to index

266

[ deuce-ish ]