• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3011 days ago

      Right, they only said “nobody can stop you from doing illegal things.”

      Completely different.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        110 days ago

        That’s not true either. The people who filed suit can stop him, but not for the entire nation.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        7
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        It was about whether or not a federal court can issue a nationwide injunction.

        The verdict has much more to do with active cases of deportees suing the US than it does to do with birthright citizenship.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 days ago

          This is technically true, but it’s also wrong.

          Yes, they didn’t technically rule on birthright citizenship, but it doesn’t matter. Without national injunctions, your right to birthright citizenship doesn’t actually exist as a practical matter.

          By the time you can file your individual case challenging the revocation of your citizenship, you’ll already be in an ICE concentration camp. And you don’t have a right to an attorney during immigration proceedings.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 days ago

      This is just cope. They did give the OK. They didn’t technically say he could revoke birthright citizenship, but they removed the ability for people to effectively challenge the revocation of their citizenship. If you can’t actually exercise your rights, then your rights don’t exist.

      But keep huffing the copium.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        110 days ago

        Please explain how they removed the ability to challenge it.

        Also, they are still going to make a decision. Just haven’t done it yet.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 days ago

          Please explain your current understanding of the ruling in full before you ask others for lengthy explanations.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            19 days ago

            I asked you first. So annoying.

            Here ya go: The ruling is against universal injunctions. Any existing injunctions stay and any future plaintiffs can block the order as well. It just can’t be stopped across the country from any existing or future rulings. Unless of course the Supreme Court ends up saying it’s unconstitutional.

            Your turn.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      611 days ago

      The supreme court did give the ok saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        14
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        That isn’t true. That is what sensationalist headlines said the verdict was. The verdict had nothing to do with birthright citizenship.

        We desperately need media literacy training as a species.

        https://youtu.be/BaAQCTMg_lk

        Edit: go no further. There is nothing of value beyond this point. You’re welcome.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          10
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          It is true. It’s not a ruling on birthright citizenship but it does stop the injunction against it.

          Edit to explain because I doubt you grasp: Without the injunction he’s free to act on a birthright citizenship ban unless sued by individuals or states on the behalf of said individuals. So over 20 states have no limit to this executive order pausing the deportation of people born in the US because they haven’t sued the federal government for breaking the 14th amendment.

          If anything this is far worse than just birthright citizenship because Trump can write executive orders far faster than lawsuits can be brought against the administration and lower federal courts can’t file injunctions against the administration, states or individuals have to sue.

          Again: The supreme court did give the ok, saying that it comes down to states and individuals to stop it because it removed the lower courts’ ability to file injunctions.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            Because you doubt I’ll grasp… Why?

            You’re the one who ate up the sensationalistic news headlines and regurgitated them like a good little boy?

            I’m not going to read the content of your response because you open with inflammatory bullshit. Grow up.

            Tagged as “fucking douche.”

            Ohh your feelings hurt because everyone downvoted you. Cool, take it out on me. That’s the Hallmark of someone to take seriously in conversation.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          611 days ago

          Start media literacy training by never citing YouTube videos as sources. It’s far better to learn to read.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            311 days ago

            The word for learning to read books is literacy.

            I was talking specifically about learning to read things that are not books.