Glitch

  • Law
  • Gaming Control Board Chairman Kirk Hendrick is stepping down. [TNI]
  • Ex-U.S. Attorney Frierson reflects on touch political climate, building trust in DOJ role. [TNI]
  • Coach upset after “glitch” causes Centennial H.S. Boyd’s basketball team to forfeit 18 games. [RJ]
  • Nevada AG announces hate crime reporting hotline. [8NewsNow]
  • Shen Yun show goes on in Las Vegas with legal battles in tow. [KTNV]
  • In a podcast with Tom Leticia, Jon Ralston discusses potential candidates for AG in 2026 [Middle Ground Podcast starting at 49:00 mark]
administrator
31 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 11:56 am

Ralston failed to name any Republican AG candidates. I think that is a mistake, especially in light of having a Republican governor with whom to run.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 3:41 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

who would you name? are there any?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 9:22 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Chatta

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 3:22 pm

Blog is dead?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 3:42 pm

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/23/politics/birthright-citizenship-lawsuit-hearing-seattle/index.html

4 years in the upside-down world coming up:

“Where were the lawyers” when the decision to sign the executive order was made, the judge asked. He said that it “boggled” his mind that a member of the bar would claim the order was constitutional.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 3:49 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

They attended the John Eastman School of Constitutional Law.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 4:12 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Seriously we should have a meaningful discussion on citizenship and the 14th Amendment. There are two sides to the story. A F.Supp federal judge’s decision is not persuasive one way or the other. I had Ginzburg as a visiting con law professor. I distinctly remember that the 14th Amendment was to protect blacks (former slaves) from divesting their citizenship. It was never intended to allow tourist birthright citizenship or automatic citizenship to illegals. Could any of us go to Mexico have a baby and claim Mexican citizenship. Don’t think so. There are so may fine lines here.
Can babies born to diplomats on U.S. soil claim U.S. citizenship. Should tourists be allowed to claim citizenship? The issues regarding Native Indians becoming citizens was not resolved to much later. The point is there is more to this than a flat nay or yea. I would welcome links to discussions on both sides of the issue.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 4:38 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Diplomats, no – “subject to the jurisdiction thereof…”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 4:39 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

I want to thumbs up this but the spelling prevents me from doing that

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 6:10 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Sure. Here’s your meaningful discussion:

There is no body of literature, scholarship, or judicial opinions that support your half-witted assertion. There is no reason to “on the other hand” with a position as dumbassed as what was set forth in the EO. Your arrogant assumptions about Mexican citizenship show how little you’ve bothered to inform yourself, as Mexico does allow for birthright citizenship, as do many other countries.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 7:12 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Alas, someone who has NOT read the works of Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the 14th.

Shame on you, sir.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 7:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Now do the 2nd amendment and the contemplation of assault rifles.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 8:05 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Keep score! Yeah! Political debates are FUN!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 7:09 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Ahhhh . . How refreshing! Someone who has actually read the works of Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the 14th, rather than just bitching about the acts of POTUS.

Thank you sir!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 4:51 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Ouch!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 23, 2025 4:54 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It is a blog with no spell check or grammar check. Like text speak.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 8:28 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Mexico does not allow for automatic tourist birth right citizenship. No other country in the world allows for this. I have Israeli friends who sent their wives to U.S. to deliver their babies so their children are automatic U.S. Citizens. They do this so their daughters can avoid compulsory military service. They are also recognized as Israel citizens. The case of Wong Kim Ark is worthy of discussion. https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/supreme-court-case-library/united-states-v-wong-kim-ark-1898
This case was incorrectly decided. There was a dissent. The issue needs to be revisited and correctly decided. The 14th Amendment was to protect ex-slaves. Most slaves or enslaved people were born in the U.S.. The importation of slaves was prohibited in 1808. Not well known. Then came the Missouri compromise in the 1820s. Slavery continued.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 9:14 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Serious question – why is it so harmful to have birthright citizenship?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 9:42 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Because illegal immigrants are going to the front of the line crossing the border illegally and having their babies born in the U.S.. They then use this to stay in U.S., get benefits and circumvent the law. It is actually hard to emigrate to U.S. legally from for example the Philippines.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 10:20 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Yes it can be hard to immagrate from countries, but most countries give travel and work visas pretty easy. My friend lives in England. Has no issues coming here. Some of my wife’s family lives on Mexico and can’t get here for over 8 years.

Anon
Guest
Anon
January 24, 2025 2:52 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Having a baby in the US while being illegal does nothing for the parent until that child turns 18 and can file for their parents.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 10:15 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Yes, Mexico does, fucko. Your ignorance is matched only by your arrogance. Try reading the Mexican Constitution, Article 30(A)(1).

Meanwhile, despite the Constitutional prohibition on the slave trade, guess what? It still happened. Slaves were illegally brought to America. They also became citizens. And if you’d actually read Howard’s speech, you’d know that he mentions several times the requirement for citizenship: being born here and being subject to our laws. Read Wade’s comments on the amendment: “The Senator from Maine suggest to me, in an undertone, that persons may be born in the United States and yet not be citizens of the United States. Most assuredly they would be citizens of the United States” unless they left and expatriated themselves to another country.

Your position is only supported by right wing fringe fucktards and their mindless lackeys. It is rightly consigned to the dustbin.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 10:52 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Oh c’mon. I went to a top tier law school and had Ginsburg for con law. She is more of an expert than you who has resorted to name calling. The 14th Amendment was to address former slaves. End of story. They have stretched it to cover hordes of illegals having babies born on U.S. soil. It was never intended for that purpose. It was enacted to keep the former Confederate states from taking away citizenship and making former slaves second class citizens. End of story. The 1898 decision is ripe for being reversed.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 11:09 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Excellent analysis. I concur with your opinion. Mic drop.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 12:27 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

All it’s going to take to change leftists opinion on birthright citizenship will be latinos voting red for another 1-2 election cycles. Keep it up!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 12:25 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

What business is it of yours where I’m from, friendo?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 27, 2025 9:19 am
Reply to  Anonymous

it is also rightly to deport them for being here illegally !

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 9:58 am

If you don’t like the 14th amendment change it. Don’t try to get rid of stari decisis- it’s not a close call. An interpretation any other way would reek havoc on our democracy. We were all upset when roe v wade was overturned. Not because of stopping abortions, but because of the lack of respect for settled law.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 11:08 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I did not like that Roe was overturned. Settled law argument is flawed however. Then Plessy v. Ferguson would still be good law. There would be no bill of rights applied to the states because of stare decisis.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 12:02 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Tell the truth, the upset ones were such, because of the perceived limitations on abortion and had not one damn thing to do with “respect for settled law”.

Any objective legal analysis can tell that Row was bad law and a severe constitutional reach.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
January 24, 2025 12:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

RBG shares the same opinion as your final sentence.