Best thig about the inauguration

[diamond10x]

Probably DJT’s speech that the last 4 presidents had to sit and take right in front of cameras with no other choice than to sit and take it. Second, probably Barron stepping over and shaking biden’s hand, seemed like a bit of a message.

[MacDaddy67]

Lauren Sanchez wearing a bra during the swearing in…

Melania looking spectacular as always…. She has so much class

[HogHunter34]

It was great. And what's sad is to have to reverse a lot of the shameful self inflicted policies the wack jobs have stood on and supported...gender disphoria, defunding police, immigration issues...

[100%TtId]

Trump signin’ EOs like Richard Petty signin’ shirts at Daytona.

[Gerald G]

Biden was thinking “ Man he’s really coming down on the former administration. I’m glad I wasn’t part of it”.🤣🤣

That’s funny!

[GarGuy]

That was some of the best TV I ever watched! Trump went down the line recognizing them like he was going to thank them for being there. Then he just flipped on them and told em what it be like!

[Bill]

Lauren Sanchez wearing a bra during the swearing in…

Melania looking spectacular as always…. She has so much class

You beat me to it. What a trashy outfit for a presential inauguration accompanying one of the wealthiest men in the world.

[flywise]

You beat me to it. What a trashy outfit for a presential inauguration accompanying one of the wealthiest men in the world.

If bezos had any class he would have told his hussy to put on something appropriate or stay home. What a bag of crap

[RiverRat1]

Well we all know she's a gold digger. And Bezos has her as a trophy. So should we expect anything else?

[Rubi513]

I heard Fetterman was wearing shorts and a hoodie.

[Artos]

I'm seeing EO's for no foreign aid for 90 days, We are out of the WHO & no more anchor babies. (last one will be challenged I'm guessing)

[tvc184]

[I]I'm seeing EO's for no foreign aid for 90 days, We are out of the WHO & no more anchor babies. (last one will be challenged I'm guessing)

Trump said that it would be challenged during the signing but also said they thought that they had a good case.

There is a good merit considering prior birthright citizenship Supreme Court decisions. Trump won’t likely win but there is a precedent, both from the 1890s.

In one case an American Indian was denied citizenship even though he was born in the territory of Montana (I think) but… his allegiance was to the Indian Nation and not the US. At about the same time in history a guy was born in the US to legal immigrants (Japanese?) and sued for birthright citizenship. He won because his parents were here legally.

So we have one actual Native American born in a US territory who was denied citizenship and a Japanese (?) child born to Japanese citizens but who were here legally who won.

I hope I have that correct but it’s too late to look it up…..

So there is precedent for deny, of all people, a Native American but allow it for an alien (legal) which leaves the question, what about a child of two illegal aliens?

Also, the Indian got his citizenship anyway because Congress then passed a law giving all Native Americans automatic citizenship. So it wasn’t the Constitution which granted Native Americans citizenship but the US Congress. That also gives credibility for the belief that Congress has to grant citizenship in such a case.

I don’t think that they will win because there are other Supreme Court cases that don’t specifically mention citizenship as an answer to a question but it’s discussed in the body of the case law.

It will likely come down to the intent of the word “jurisdiction” in the Fourteenth Amendment.

There is therefore, in my opinion, a good argument looking at Supreme Court precedent and it isn’t just Trump blowing hot air. I just think that in 2025 however, the Supreme Court is not going to step up and uphold their precedents but like they did in Roe V Wade, will basically override their own precedents.

[Bassdeer]

Life is good now.

[flywise]

Trump said that it would be challenged during the signing but also said they thought that they had a good case.

There is a good merit considering prior birthright citizenship Supreme Court decisions. Trump won’t likely win but there is a precedent, both from the 1890s.

In one case an American Indian was denied citizenship even though he was born in the territory of Montana (I think) but… his allegiance was to the Indian Nation and not the US. At about the same time in history a guy was born in the US to legal immigrants (Japanese?) and sued for birthright citizenship. He won because his parents were here legally.

So we have one actual Native American born in a US territory who was denied citizenship and a Japanese (?) child born to Japanese citizens but who were here legally who won.

I hope I have that correct but it’s too late to look it up…..

So there is precedent for deny, of all people, a Native American but allow it for an alien (legal) which leaves the question, what about a child of two illegal aliens?

Also, the Indian got his citizenship anyway because Congress then passed a law giving all Native Americans automatic citizenship. So it wasn’t the Constitution which granted Native Americans citizenship but the US Congress. That also gives credibility for the belief that Congress has to grant citizenship in such a case.

I don’t think that they will win because there are other Supreme Court cases that don’t specifically mention citizenship as an answer to a question but it’s discussed in the body of the case law.

It will likely come down to the intent of the word “jurisdiction” in the Fourteenth Amendment.

There is therefore, in my opinion, a good argument looking at Supreme Court precedent and it isn’t just Trump blowing hot air. I just think that in 2025 however, the Supreme Court is not going to step up and uphold their precedents but like they did in Roe V Wade, will basically override their own precedents.

Correct, if you are here illegally you are not under the jurisdiction of the US because we have no idea you are here. The constitution absolutely does not say if you are born here you are automatically a citizen. The bad thing is that gov. has ignored this fact for over a hundred years. The scotus might say the gov. set precedent by not enforcing it. I do hold out hope that illegal activity does not lead to reward in the eyes of scotus

[Goldeneagle]

Melania looking spectacular as always…. She has so much class

She really rocks that Bolero look.