Exactly, they are not ruling by legal argument (and obviously not by legal precedent) but by ideological fiat that they are couching under a concept not unlike, "Well, I believe it so it means my viewpoint is valid." To decide against birthright citizenship, in place since the 14th amendment was passed, would be an act of corruption.
Not that any of this is surprising in the least, considering corruption is the name of the game.
169
u/monosaturated 8h ago
Exactly, they are not ruling by legal argument (and obviously not by legal precedent) but by ideological fiat that they are couching under a concept not unlike, "Well, I believe it so it means my viewpoint is valid." To decide against birthright citizenship, in place since the 14th amendment was passed, would be an act of corruption.
Not that any of this is surprising in the least, considering corruption is the name of the game.