On Wednesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Ingraham Angle,” Fox News Contributor and George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley discussed the birthright citizenship case in front of the Supreme Court and said that it was “hilarious” to listen to the left-leaning justices sound like the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.
The case in question involves a challenge to President Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship for children born to non-citizens on U.S. soil. The issue of birthright citizenship has been a hotly debated topic, with some arguing that it is a fundamental right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, while others argue that it is being abused by those seeking to exploit the system.
Turley, who is known for his balanced and non-partisan analysis, pointed out the irony of the liberal justices sounding like Scalia, a staunch defender of the Constitution and original intent. He noted that the left has often criticized Scalia for his strict interpretation of the Constitution, but in this case, they seem to be adopting his approach.
“It’s quite hilarious to watch these left-leaning justices suddenly sound like Scalia,” Turley said. “They are arguing for a strict interpretation of the Constitution and the original intent of the framers. It’s almost as if they have forgotten their own arguments against Scalia in the past.”
Turley went on to explain that the 14th Amendment was never intended to grant citizenship to children born to non-citizens on U.S. soil. He cited the debates and discussions surrounding the amendment’s ratification, which clearly show that the framers did not intend for it to be interpreted in such a broad manner.
He also pointed out that the issue of birthright citizenship has been a contentious one, with many countries around the world not granting automatic citizenship to children born to non-citizens. He argued that it is a policy decision that should be left to Congress, not the courts.
Turley’s analysis highlights the importance of having a balanced and diverse Supreme Court, where different perspectives and interpretations can be heard. It also serves as a reminder that the Constitution should not be subject to political whims and agendas, but rather should be interpreted based on its original intent.
The birthright citizenship case is just one of many important cases that the Supreme Court will be hearing this term. As the highest court in the land, it is crucial that the justices approach each case with an open mind and a commitment to upholding the Constitution.
In the end, the decision on birthright citizenship will have far-reaching implications for our nation and its immigration policies. It is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and a thorough understanding of the Constitution. Let us hope that the Supreme Court will fulfill its duty to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of all Americans.
In conclusion, Turley’s observation on the birthright citizenship case serves as a reminder that even in the most contentious of issues, there is always room for respectful debate and differing opinions. It also highlights the importance of having a diverse and balanced Supreme Court, where all voices can be heard. Let us hope that the justices will continue to uphold the principles of our Constitution and make decisions that are in the best interest of our nation.
