The Trump administration has sought to restrict citizenship to children with at least one parent with citizenship or permanent legal status.

Alito warned in his dissent the ruling could have “grotesque results,” including an encouragement of “birth tourism,” and national security ramifications.

“If the Fourteenth Amendment required these results, the country would have to live with them or amend the Constitution,” he wrote. “But the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the rule the Court now imposes on the country.

“In my judgment, the Court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country’s future,” he continued.

Alito accused the majority opinion of relying “on precedent that glosses the text” of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause and that their argument “fails on textualist grounds.”

The conservative justice specifically pointed to the 14th Amendment’s reference to a person who is “subject to the jurisdiction of,” arguing that the court’s majority failed to consider issues of dual citizenship.

For that last bit related to being “subject to the jurisdiction of," is he suggesting that foreigners aren’t subject to criminal prosecutions? Like, if some gal who is foreign and lacks citizenship/greencard/visa/foreign service/etc. snuck in and randomly shoots someone, they’d not be subject to US prosecution? What if they’re also apprehended with a ton of Schedule 1 narcotics? We supposed to be like “Ope! She’s not subject to US jurisdiction. So, we better send her home with a stern finger wagging.”

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This asshole is such a broken individual. He should be impeached. The fact that he has so much influence over millions says a lot about our system.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    Given that birthright citizenship has been the rule since the Civil War, is he saying that all of subsequent American history is an example of these “grotesque results”?

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Honestly don’t care about birth right citizenship. Tons of countries don’t have it. It made sense for north America when travel was long but now.

    • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      My family’s been here since 1733 and never took a test. If birthright citizenship isn’t real then am I a citizen?

      And if we’ve never been citizens, who do we sue to get back all the taxes we paid?

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    “Careful analysis of the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the process that led to its adoption shows that it does not degrade the concept of United States citizenship in this way,” Alito wrote. “Instead, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”

    Hmm, let’s look a the actual text of the 14th amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

    The word “solely” doesn’t appear there once. There is absolutely nothing there that states that being a citizen of another country disqualifies you, or your kids. (If it did, it would be impossible to be naturalized as a US citizen without first renouncing your original citizenship). It’s obvious that this clause was meant to apply to diplomats and other people who get some forms of immunity from local prosecution.

    What an asshat…

    • Sunflier@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Alito wrote. “Instead, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”

      The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868. Its primary purpose was to secure rights for formerly enslaved people, establishing birthright citizenship, barring states from denying “equal protection of the laws,” and ensuring “due process” for all individuals. Slaves were freed in 1865. Wonder how and when the former slaves became obligated to owe allegiance to the US after it had them enslaved for half their life.

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Not to mention, that would mean that citizenship wouldn’t be granted to kids who have at least one parent with dual citizenship. As those kids could potentially be under the jurisdiction of the other country.

        His reasoning in his dissent doesn’t hold up to even basic scrutiny.

        • Sunflier@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Not to mention, that would mean that citizenship wouldn’t be granted to kids who have at least one parent with dual citizenship.

          The Nazis had the same way of looking at ancestry for determining whether someone was Jewish.

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Bah! What are the Supreme Court Justices doing, relying on this pesky thing called ‘precedent’? They’re supposed to be making up justifications as they see fit, based on who invited them to their yacht or resort retreat!

  • santa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    He’s a serious mistake.

    Given this ruling, if there are future considerations by Court I’m sure he’ll now recuse himself /s

  • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    19 hours ago

    @[email protected] I was thinking the same exact thing. If someone is in the country and not under the jurisdiction of said country they would have complete immunity in my humble opinion.

    Guy is an idiot among other unflattering things.