The God-King wants the Supreme Court to let him revoke citizenship at will, plus other stuff…. (More)
“Your argument is demeaning the priceless value of citizenship”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. tried to test the limits of the government’s position at a Supreme Court argument on Wednesday by confessing to a criminal offense.
“Some time ago, outside the statute of limitations, I drove 60 miles an hour in a 55-mile-an-hour zone,” the chief justice said, adding that he had not been caught.
The form that people seeking American citizenship must complete, he added, asks whether the applicant had ever committed a criminal offense, however minor, even if there was no arrest.
“If I answer that question no, 20 years after I was naturalized as a citizen, you can knock on my door and say, ‘Guess what, you’re not an American citizen after all’?” Chief Justice Roberts asked.
Robert A. Parker, a Justice Department lawyer, said the offense had to be disclosed. Chief Justice Roberts seemed shocked. “Oh, come on,” he said.
The chief justice asked again whether someone’s citizenship could turn on such an omission.
Mr. Parker did not back down. “If we can prove that you deliberately lied in answering that question, then yes,” he said.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy had heard enough.
“Your argument is demeaning the priceless value of citizenship,” he told Mr. Parker. “You’re arguing for the government of the United States, talking about what citizenship is and ought to mean.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked about the failure to disclose an embarrassing childhood nickname. Justice Elena Kagan said she was a “little bit horrified to know that every time I lie about my weight it has those kinds of consequences.”
Mr. Parker said the law applied to all false statements, even trivial ones.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer said it was “rather surprising that the government of the United States thinks” that the naturalization laws should be “interpreted in a way that would throw into doubt the citizenship of vast percentages of all naturalized citizens.”
While that case involved only naturalized citizens, the God-King has said he wants a law that would strip the citizenship of anyone – even a natural-born citizen – who burns a U.S. flag in protest. Yes, really.
“There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It’s outrageous.”
President Donald Trump floated the idea of breaking up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday, misidentifying it yet again as the court responsible for the nationwide injunction issued Tuesday against his executive order regarding so-called sanctuary cities.
“There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit,” Trump told the Washington Examiner in an interview. “It’s outrageous.”
On Tuesday, Judge Williams Orrick III of the Northern District of California issued a preliminary nationwide injunction against part of an executive order that threatened to withhold federal funding from localities that refused to comply with Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer requests.
As noted, Judge Orrick doesn’t serve on the 9th Circuit. He’s a federal district judge, a trial judge. The 9th Circuit won’t rule on that case unless and until the trial decision is appealed. But this isn’t really about the law, as New York Magazine’s Ed Kilgore explains:
A pretty cursory glance at all the adverse decisions on the travel ban should inform Trump that the problem was not with the language of his order, but with the things he said during the campaign that suggest the order was an implicit effort to impose a blatantly unconstitutional Muslim ban. He might eventually prevail on that issue if it reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, but he has no one but himself to blame until then.
As for the new decision on the sanctuary cities order, all his ranting and raving about murderous immigrants has almost nothing to do with the legal issues, which involve the contradiction between his attorneys’ claim his order is intended to be merely symbolic, and his own (and his attorney general’s) claims they will strip the sanctuary cities of any and all federal funds.
If you did not know better, you might suspect the whole saga is intended to excite Trump’s hard-core base, which may otherwise become disappointed by all he has been unable to accomplish so far.
In any event, splitting up the Ninth Circuit ain’t happening so long as Democrats have the 41 senators needed to filibuster such a plan in the Senate. But the president is free to rave on if he wishes.
In other words, the God-King’s raging against judges is simply more of his lifelong pattern: Fail, Blame Someone Else, Declare Victory, and Change the Subject.
“We just can’t keep up, can we?”
That last part – Changing the Subject – is one of the keys to the God-King’s overall strategy, as No More Mister Nice Blog’s Steve M. explains in discussing why the Royal Princess will probably get away with running a “private capital firm” out of the White House:
But Ivanka will get away with this, just the way the entire Trump family has been getting away with blatant violations of Constitution’s emoluments clause. There won’t be a clamor to stop this.
Why? To a large extent, it’s the family’s pure brazenness. Beyond that, Democrats don’t have a Fox News equivalent that can turn this sort of thing a round-the-clock scandal for days, weeks, or months.
But the Trumps also get away with things like this because of what I’m beginning to see as their Gish Gallop-ization of politics.
The Gish Gallop is an argument method where a speaker spews dubious claims and rationales so rapidly that it’s impossible to rebut them all. And if even one of the dozens of half-baked ideas is allowed to pass unrebutted, the speaker claims to have “won the debate.” Steve M. says the God-King us using a similar approach to lying and corruption:
Donald Trump – with good reason – has been accused of using this tactic in his public utterances. But I think the principle of the Gish Gallop applies to more than just rhetoric (and tweets). If something you do is offensive, outrageous, or even illegal, it might be easier to get away with it if you do a lot of it. Your critics simply become frustrated trying to counter what you’re doing.
For instance, the president seems to Gish-Gallop ignorance. We can refute him on point after point, but after a while, it’s hard to keep up – the fact-checks go on for pages and pages. That’s why Trump’s recent AP interview was so exhausting.
I think the Trumps are Gish-Galloping corruption. It’s easy to focus on one corrupt practice — but the Trumps are corrupt across the board. We just can’t keep up, can we?
So Ivanka will slide by with this – and the Trumps will slide by with the next thirty or forty corrupt, self-dealing acts.
The God-King has used this tactic all his life, hopping from real estate to casinos to sports teams to name-branding to beauty pageants to reality TV to politics. He has failed at almost every turn, yet he always blames someone else, declares victory, and moves on. He’s built his celebrity status – the only thing he’s really good at – at every step along the way, and now he’s furious that many in the media won’t buy the same schtick from the White House.
Maybe that’s why he wants to revoke the citizenship of people who dare to protest him….
Photo Credit: Chris Carlson (AP)
Good day and good nuts