Videos tagged with Birthright Citizenship

This video discusses the legal interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause, specifically the requirement of being 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in addition to being born in the United States. The speaker argues that this clause implies loyalty to the U.S. and not a foreign power, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1866 as precedent. The discussion centers on a potential Supreme Court case challenging birthright citizenship based on this interpretation, influenced by a Donald Trump executive order.

This video discusses the legal interpretation of the 14th Amendment concerning birthright citizenship, particularly in the context of children born to undocumented immigrants. Host Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney and Supreme Court Bar member, argues that the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in the 14th Amendment implies an allegiance to the United States, not a foreign power. He connects this to the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and historical examples like Native Americans, suggesting that current interpretations have deviated from the original intent. The discussion highlights the legal arguments surrounding the case *Thompson v. Trump* (referred to as Barbara v. Trump in the video) and the concept of 'standing' in legal challenges.

This video discusses the upcoming Supreme Court case Trump v. Hawaii, which challenges the interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause regarding birthright citizenship for children of parents who entered the U.S. illegally. It contrasts the historical context of the amendment, aimed at overturning Dred Scott, with current debates about 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof.' The speaker emphasizes the importance of constitutional structures over majority rule and questions the president's authority to amend constitutional application via executive order.

This video provides a legal analysis of the Supreme Court case Trump v. Barbara, which concerns the interpretation of the 14th Amendment's 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' clause in relation to birthright citizenship. It explores arguments for and against President Trump's executive order attempting to alter birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, highlighting the historical context of the 14th Amendment and its application in past legal challenges.

This video discusses a significant US Supreme Court decision in Donald Trump v. Casa, which ruled against the use of universal injunctions by district court judges. The court, in a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, determined that such broad injunctions, which prevent federal government enforcement of laws against all citizens, are unconstitutional and lack historical precedent. The ruling is presented as a major win for the Trump administration and a blow to 'lawfare' tactics.

This video features Mark W. Smith, a recognized expert in 2A rights, discussing critical Supreme Court oral arguments that could impact nationwide injunctions. The analysis delves into constitutional limits on judicial power, particularly Article 3's case-or-controversy requirement, and explores alternative legal remedies like vacatur under the APA for challenging executive actions. The discussion highlights potential implications for Second Amendment rights and the broader scope of judicial authority.

This video discusses a US Supreme Court case concerning birthright citizenship, focusing on procedural issues rather than the merits of the case itself. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney and member of the Supreme Court Bar, explains the concept of 'standing' in legal challenges and the implications of universal injunctions issued by federal district courts. The core of the discussion revolves around whether states and non-profit organizations have legal standing to challenge an executive order on birthright citizenship and the Supreme Court's potential ruling on the scope of federal district court injunctions.

This video discusses an upcoming meeting between President Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi, focusing on Second Amendment executive orders and potential legal strategies. Key topics include the role of the Solicitor General, the restoration of rights for non-violent felons, and the interpretation of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. The speaker emphasizes the strategic timing of these discussions in relation to upcoming confirmations and legal challenges.

This video analyzes the legal arguments surrounding Donald Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, focusing on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney and Second Amendment advocate, argues that the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' implies an allegiance to the United States, which children of illegal aliens may not possess. He draws parallels to historical interpretations and Supreme Court cases like US v. Juan Kim Arc, suggesting that birthright citizenship may not automatically apply to children born to individuals in the US illegally or through visa fraud.

This video explains the legal concept of 'standing' as it applies to federal court cases, particularly in the context of Second Amendment rights and challenges to executive orders. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, argues that states often lack standing to sue the federal government, as they may not be directly harmed and could even benefit financially from certain policies. He proposes using the standing doctrine offensively against challenges to an executive order on birthright citizenship, suggesting that the individuals directly affected (illegal aliens and their children) would have standing but would risk deportation if they pursued legal action.

This video delves into the legal interpretation of birthright citizenship in the United States, primarily focusing on the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court case *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*. The speaker, a constitutional attorney, argues that the 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' clause in the 14th Amendment provides a basis for excluding children of illegal immigrants from automatic citizenship. The discussion also touches upon Donald Trump's proposed policy to end birthright citizenship via executive order and the legal challenges it might face.

The video argues that neither the President nor Congress should unilaterally interpret constitutional amendments like the 14th Amendment regarding birthright citizenship. The speaker emphasizes that this role belongs to the courts. The argument extends to the Second Amendment, cautioning against presidential executive orders that redefine its scope, drawing a parallel to the potential for hypocrisy if such power is accepted for one amendment but not another.