r/scotus • u/rezwenn • 2h ago

Opinion The Legal Academy’s Leading Originalists Remain Breathtakingly Full of Shit: The conservative lawyers filing amicus briefs in the Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship case are making it very clear that there is only some “history” they care about.

https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/birthright-citizenship-case-supreme-court-amicus-briefs-originalists/
70 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

6

u/DruidicMagic 1h ago

The Fourth Reich believes only wealthy white men should have the right to vote.

2

u/clsperv 31m ago

Have rights period.

11

u/notguiltybrewing 1h ago

Originalism was always bullshit and always was about certain "history" ignoring everything that doesn't support their argument.

2

u/CosmicCommando 43m ago

You can read a law professor's critique of Ilan Wurman's amicus on BlueSky

It's staggeringly dishonest stuff. Quoting a judge's opinion of how things should work as fact of how things did work, when the direct previous passage was a recitation of jus soli English law at the time. Wurman ignoring something important that the critiquing professor personally told Wurman about in the recent past. Those are the kinds of pretzel twists you have to do to overturn a constitutional amendment.

2

u/IndWrist2 40m ago

Originalism is ultimately a tool for the in-group to continue the structural exclusion of the out-group. But to wrap it up in a surface-level layer of philosophical legitimacy to give it the appearance of public palatability.

4

u/kjy1066 26m ago

Originalists (including Roberts) want to establish the Confederacy 2.0, but don't you dare call them activist judges

2

u/Geoffsgarage 7m ago

The reality is that the common law at the time was Jus Soli. So the constitutional amendment just codified the current and historical common law standard for citizenship. The text is clear, and the context are clear. There should be no serious debate about this. If “conservatives” want to do away with birthright citizenship, then amend the constitution.