SCOTUS To Review Birthright Citizenship: Conveniently Overlooking Its Own
The mainstream media presents this as an abstract 'legal challenge' to the 14th Amendment, neatly sidestepping the fact that many current and past Justices themselves are products of that very amendment—or even prior interpretations that expanded citizenship. Justice Gorsuch, for example, whose parents are naturalized citizens, benefits from the broad interpretation of a constitutional principle
now under attack. It raises the question: Will the court apply this constitutional scrutiny equally, or only to those deemed less 'desirable' newcomers, reminiscent of historical anti-immigrant campaigns that routinely demonized migrant groups? One might wonder if the Court will also re-examine the legal definition of 'person' introduced for corporations in the 19th century, or if constitutional
interpretation only flexes when it suits political agendas targeting specific demographics. It's a selective legal memory, choosing when to uphold 'original intent' and when to invent new readings. How many 'founding principles' are truly immutable when political winds shift?