The Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship in a 6-3 ruling, but John Leguizamo is wondering: How was this not a clean sweep? Leguizamo examines the ri
Kavanaugh did not rule that it was a violation of the Constitution. Instead he ruled it violated a US Code provision. So it was only striking down the executive order was 6-3. The ruling that it was a violation of the Constitution was just 5-4. Ridiculous.
I love this guy so much. I used his Netflix special to teach rhetorical analysis at university and inevitably it was the students’ favorite assignment.
Also incredible that he believes the tax payers will be paying for the births... Buddy, people aren't having babies because medical expenses aren't covered by the government
Even from a procedural aspect, it should have been 9-0 because the three who voted to end birthright citizenship were saying that an EXECUTIVE ORDER can overturn the Constitution. Their dissent was, in and of itself, UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
If you think you love freedom but you don't care if it applies to everyone, then what you actually love is privilege.
We use cookies, device fingerprinting and cross-device tracking to personalise content, serve targeted advertising, and analyse how you use our site across your devices. By clicking Accept all you consent to the use of these tracking technologies. Your data may be used to build a profile of your interests and show you personalised ads on other sites.
Privacy policy
Comments (20)
Daily Junction discussion mixed with clearly attributed comments from the original video provider.
Join in — free. Comments on Daily Junction are for members, so real names stay rare and bots stay out.
One field. We email you a 6-digit code — no password needed. Your comment is kept while you do it.
Under 13? You’ll need a parent’s OK first — it takes them one click.
If you’re not familiar, look up a video clip.
that is to say, not at all.