Birthright Citizenship

Current Events: The Supreme Court has decided that it would limit the ability of judges to limit presidential executive orders.

This is a major development.  I was confident that Federal courts would prevail, and prevent the prez from wielding this power.

To clarify: the way the law (a right enshrined in the US constitution as an Amendment, I believe) has been understood for all these years—at least since the Civil War—was that anyone born on US soil was eligible for citizenship.  But the present administration takes the view that only infants born to parents—to mothers, anyway—who are in the US legally have that right.

It is a fine point, but difficult to oppose, in my view.  Conservatives have been frustrated for a century at the ability for illegal visitors to this country to have babies that are automatically given citizenship.  Those who have felt, since the Civil War, at least, that US citizenship should not be rationed out stingily and sparingly, but granted to any infant as reasonably possible, held to the generous interpretation of the law.  But those who disliked the consequence of that law, that the birth rate among non-whites was a lot higher than among the children of whites, were pleased at this interpretation of the current administration. 

The prez is not a student of the law; he truly is nothing but a real-estate developer.  I am not versed in the law, either.  But there are lawyers advising him, and they appear to have thought this through.  The right way to do this is to get the law clarified by Congress, and ratified by the States.  It would be difficult to get it through two-thirds of the states (34 states?) with state representatives swayed by emotional appeals.

As much as I hate to agree with the prez, if there were some evidence to believe that a majority of citizens supported this amendment, I would support it too.

Kay

Well, just a minute!  Apparently the decision by the Supreme Court meant that some infants born in one state may be qualified as a citizen, but an infant born in another state may not!  I'm too peeved to read the whole article.  Here it is:

Political Musings

One thing I have wondered about for a long time, at least as far back as 2016, is (1) why do political commentators write in such high-flown language.  In contrast, (2) why does the prez speak in such disjointed language?  I'm reading comments about the performance of women basketball players, and some of the remarks are so poorly written as to be utterly unintelligible.  I obviously can't connect the ramblings of a deranged sports fan with those of a ill-spoken president, but it's awfully tempting to do so. 

Is it the case that everyone, young and old, is sick and tired of careful writing and speech, and are drawn to those who talk—and write—like toddlers?  I have even seen newspaper reporting with egregious mistakes in grammar and syntax (there I go again with my big words; any readers here who are also sports fans will be sticking pins in Kay Hemlock dolls), which must mean that either those articles were written in an awful hurry, or they've had to hire summer interns who are not up to the job. 

If Democrats want to be taken seriously, they may have to practice baby talk.  

Kay