First of all, the Republican appointees on the court are not exactly RINOs or secret Democrats.
And just a few days ago, she voted against the right of biological males to compete in women's sports.
There are illegals who have been in this country for twenty or even thirty years.
Even so, no one, not even Clarence Thomas, challenges the fact that their children in this country have a constitutional right to be US citizens.
Why? Because the relevant constitutional phrase is, quote, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." It means subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and quite obviously, a family living here for decades is subject to US jurisdiction.
Moreover, one cannot pragmatically send these children back to countries to which they have no ties and whose language they very often do not speak.
So what are we talking about here? We're talking about birth tourism, which is to say about people who come to this country in order to have children so that their children can automatically become US citizens.
Does the Constitution affirm birth tourism as a right? And what, if anything, do we do about it? Let's begin by noting that there's no good argument for birth tourism.
Recently, The New York Times did a long profile of a Honduran woman who was deported from the country and then travels seventeen hundred miles to sneak back in so her child could be born in America.
First of all, the Republican appointees on the court are not exactly RINOs or secret Democrats.
And just a few days ago, she voted against the right of biological males to compete in women's sports.
There are illegals who have been in this country for twenty or even thirty years.
Even so, no one, not even Clarence Thomas, challenges the fact that their children in this country have a constitutional right to be US citizens.
Why? Because the relevant constitutional phrase is, quote, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." It means subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and quite obviously, a family living here for decades is subject to US jurisdiction.
Moreover, one cannot pragmatically send these children back to countries to which they have no ties and whose language they very often do not speak.
So what are we talking about here? We're talking about birth tourism, which is to say about people who come to this country in order to have children so that their children can automatically become US citizens.
Does the Constitution affirm birth tourism as a right? And what, if anything, do we do about it? Let's begin by noting that there's no good argument for birth tourism.
Recently, The New York Times did a long profile of a Honduran woman who was deported from the country and then travels seventeen hundred miles to sneak back in so her child could be born in America.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.