1 Trending: Axios Says The Problem With Democrats’ Embrace Of Communism Is Republicans Noticing

2 Trending: DSA Colorado Win Shows Third-World Communism Is The New Norm In The Democrat Party

3 Trending: The Supreme Court Doesn’t Have The Final Word On Birthplace Citizenship

4 Trending: The Supreme Court’s Abysmal Birthplace Citizenship Ruling Is Exactly Why We Should Ban Surrogacy

SCOTUS Pasting Birth Tourism Into The Constitution Demands A Legal System Rebuild

That a court with six Republican-appointed justices could hand down such a patently un-American decision is an indictment of America’s rogue legal system.

Share Article on Facebook

Share Article on Twitter

Share Article on Truth Social

Share Article via Email

The Roberts Court just handed down a majority birthplace citizenship decision on the legal level of Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade. No judge who calls himself an originalist, textualist, or in any way claims dedication to American rule of law could support the 5-4 majority in Trump v. Barbara.

As the dissents and much other scholarly work show plainly and definitively, the 14th Amendment simply does not say that anyone who happens to be born on U.S. soil thereby magically becomes a U.S. citizen. “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” It’s not legally or verbally complicated.

It’s also not philosophically complicated. The American founders and the 14th Amendment framers’ understanding of citizenship has always been rooted in the consent of the governed, in an explicit rejection of the medieval subjectship Chief Justice John Roberts employed as the basis for his anti-American ruling. While Kavanaugh’s compromise position has legal and prudential merit, there is simply no legal, cultural, practical, or philosophical justification in legitimately American jurisprudence for Roberts’ majority.

The simplest way to know that’s true, for judges who can’t think their way out of a Washington Post editorial-lashing, is if you’re ruling with Ketanji “I don’t understand” Brown Jackson and against Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, you’re wrong.

That a court with six Republican-appointed justices could hand down such a patently un-American, anti-Constitutional decision is an indictment of America’s rogue legal system. It only accents the scores of horrific decisions coming daily out of the federal judiciary in the age of Trump that Roberts has abandoned his duty, as chief magistrate, to curb.

It’s past time that elected officials of the party that claims to love the Constitution and its principles made substantive reforms to a legal system that seems incapable of producing three or four other justices — let alone a federal bench — worthy of Thomas’ and Alito’s legacies out of the 350 million people in the greatest country in the world.

In the same way that the right started a legal movement to overturn Roe, we need a legal movement to overturn this terrible decision of birthright citizenship.The child of a Chinese spy born in the states is not an American.— Ryan James Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) June 30, 2026

In the same way that the right started a legal movement to overturn Roe, we need a........

© The Federalist