• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In their view of America, MAGA sides with Judge Taney over Lincoln & Dred Scott over the 14th Amendment

j brown's body

"A Soros-backed animal"
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
79,664
Reaction score
84,174
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
“America is not just an idea,” Vance declared. “It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future. It is, in short, a nation.” ...Vance seemed to suggest...that American identity was less about our national ideals than it was attachment to “a homeland.” ...At Claremont, Vance made his meaning clear: “If you think about it, identifying America just with agreeing with the principles, let’s say, of the Declaration of Independence, that’s a definition that is way overinclusive and underinclusive at the same time,” the vice president said, taking aim at traditional American creedal nationalism. ...To make this point, Vance went after Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, for his Independence Day message describing America as “beautiful, contradictory, unfinished.” “Has he ever looked in the mirror and recognized that he might not be alive were it not for the generosity of a country he dares to insult on its most sacred day?” Vance said. “Who the hell does he think that he is?” Vance and Mamdani are equal citizens under the law, but the vice president seems to believe that his heritage entitles him to speak in ways that Mamdani can’t. There are tiers of belonging, according to Vance, one for those who can trace their lineage to one of the nation’s two founding revolutions and another for those who can’t.

In his opinion for the court, Chief Justice Roger Taney agreed. Black people could never be citizens, he argued, because the founders had never intended it. ...Their heritage made them subjects. And because in his view, the Constitution spoke “not only in the same words, but with the same meaning and intent with which it spoke when it came from the hands of its framers,” Black Americans could never be citizens, either. Their status was fixed. ...For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies....For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies.

...It is striking that the vice president invokes the Civil War to make his point. The great ideological victory of that conflict was to establish the United States as a nation “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” When, at Gettysburg, Lincoln pronounced a “new birth of freedom,” consecrated by those who “gave the last full measure of devotion,” he meant the egalitarian freedom that Taney and others like him sought to deny. ...Vance sees the egalitarian ideals of our founding documents but says, as Taney did, that we must look elsewhere for our vision of American citizenship. And that elsewhere is your heritage — your connection to the soil and to the dead. ...it’s here that we see the logic of Trump’s attack on the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship, which wrote the egalitarian promise of the Declaration of Independence into the Constitution itself.


Trump and Vance envision a world of tiered citizenship, each in his own way, where entry depends on heritage and status rests on obedience. The best traditions of our country make this difficult. And so they have found refuge in our worst."

Link

Our antebellum Supreme Court might agree. An utter abandonment of founding Republican Party principles.

You can already see MAGA create a tiered citizenship with women stripped of their constitutional right to control their own bodies and the elimination of transgenders in public life. Lots of rules and government enforcement of them to keep people in line.
 
“America is not just an idea,” Vance declared. “It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future. It is, in short, a nation.” ...Vance seemed to suggest...that American identity was less about our national ideals than it was attachment to “a homeland.” ...At Claremont, Vance made his meaning clear: “If you think about it, identifying America just with agreeing with the principles, let’s say, of the Declaration of Independence, that’s a definition that is way overinclusive and underinclusive at the same time,” the vice president said, taking aim at traditional American creedal nationalism. ...To make this point, Vance went after Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, for his Independence Day message describing America as “beautiful, contradictory, unfinished.” “Has he ever looked in the mirror and recognized that he might not be alive were it not for the generosity of a country he dares to insult on its most sacred day?” Vance said. “Who the hell does he think that he is?” Vance and Mamdani are equal citizens under the law, but the vice president seems to believe that his heritage entitles him to speak in ways that Mamdani can’t. There are tiers of belonging, according to Vance, one for those who can trace their lineage to one of the nation’s two founding revolutions and another for those who can’t.

In his opinion for the court, Chief Justice Roger Taney agreed. Black people could never be citizens, he argued, because the founders had never intended it. ...Their heritage made them subjects. And because in his view, the Constitution spoke “not only in the same words, but with the same meaning and intent with which it spoke when it came from the hands of its framers,” Black Americans could never be citizens, either. Their status was fixed. ...For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies....For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies.

...It is striking that the vice president invokes the Civil War to make his point. The great ideological victory of that conflict was to establish the United States as a nation “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” When, at Gettysburg, Lincoln pronounced a “new birth of freedom,” consecrated by those who “gave the last full measure of devotion,” he meant the egalitarian freedom that Taney and others like him sought to deny. ...Vance sees the egalitarian ideals of our founding documents but says, as Taney did, that we must look elsewhere for our vision of American citizenship. And that elsewhere is your heritage — your connection to the soil and to the dead. ...it’s here that we see the logic of Trump’s attack on the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship, which wrote the egalitarian promise of the Declaration of Independence into the Constitution itself.


Trump and Vance envision a world of tiered citizenship, each in his own way, where entry depends on heritage and status rests on obedience. The best traditions of our country make this difficult. And so they have found refuge in our worst."

Link

Our antebellum Supreme Court might agree. An utter abandonment of founding Republican Party principles.

You can already see MAGA create a tiered citizenship with women stripped of their constitutional right to control their own bodies and the elimination of transgenders in public life. Lots of rules and government enforcement of them to keep people in line.
Only ONE judge dissented in 1896...............many times the majority screws up................just like the majority of voters in 2024
 
Only ONE judge dissented in 1896...............many times the majority screws up................just like the majority of voters in 2024
The majority in 2024 is a group of maleficent TRUMP traitors who do not deserve to call themselves American. Every on of them needs to be disbarred. Thomas needs to be forced to sell everything he owns to pay back all the bribes he took.
 
“America is not just an idea,” Vance declared. “It is a group of people with a shared history and a common future. It is, in short, a nation.” ...Vance seemed to suggest...that American identity was less about our national ideals than it was attachment to “a homeland.” ...At Claremont, Vance made his meaning clear: “If you think about it, identifying America just with agreeing with the principles, let’s say, of the Declaration of Independence, that’s a definition that is way overinclusive and underinclusive at the same time,” the vice president said, taking aim at traditional American creedal nationalism. ...To make this point, Vance went after Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, for his Independence Day message describing America as “beautiful, contradictory, unfinished.” “Has he ever looked in the mirror and recognized that he might not be alive were it not for the generosity of a country he dares to insult on its most sacred day?” Vance said. “Who the hell does he think that he is?” Vance and Mamdani are equal citizens under the law, but the vice president seems to believe that his heritage entitles him to speak in ways that Mamdani can’t. There are tiers of belonging, according to Vance, one for those who can trace their lineage to one of the nation’s two founding revolutions and another for those who can’t.

In his opinion for the court, Chief Justice Roger Taney agreed. Black people could never be citizens, he argued, because the founders had never intended it. ...Their heritage made them subjects. And because in his view, the Constitution spoke “not only in the same words, but with the same meaning and intent with which it spoke when it came from the hands of its framers,” Black Americans could never be citizens, either. Their status was fixed. ...For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies....For the chief justice, too, the words of the Declaration of Independence were overinclusive. They conferred citizenship and belonging to more people than the framers could have possibly meant. And so, Taney concluded, we must look to other sources — in his case, slavery and racial prejudice — to find the truth, which is that American citizenship was a closed door and the United States was a tiered society of rigid hierarchies.

...edited for spaced


Link

Our antebellum Supreme Court might agree. An utter abandonment of founding Republican Party principles.

You can already see MAGA create a tiered citizenship with women stripped of their constitutional right to control their own bodies and the elimination of transgenders in public life. Lots of rules and government enforcement of them to keep people in line.



My school years were spent in the USA. I was taught accordingly about the constitution across three classes and eight years. Some of what they taught turned out to be bullshit and NO ONE could explain how the draft was constitutional as it violated about four statutes as I recall.

Then, as a broadcast journalist it became my job to cover Canada's constitutional talks from 1976 through 1986 when the "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" was signed by her majesty, Queen Elizabeth II.

During those years of negotiations between Ottawa and the provinces involving 16 premiers and four prime ministers over the years the shortfalls of the US brand became front and center in the negotiations.

I learned every weakness in the US brand, every failing, as each of the country's representatives rejected those ideas in turn.

Americans have been lied to. You are not nearly as free as you think you are and the bottom line is there is no defense against a determined internal enemy who can strategize over several presidential terms.

The scariest is that I recall the warning from then that the continued expansion of powers by presidents would be the nation's undoing. The trigger then was the National Highway System of "Thruway" network which was technically unconstitutional
 
Making America great again seems to mean taking us back to before the Civil War.

One wonders if majority on the SCOTUS will cite the Dred Scott decision in defense of their nullifying the citizenship part of the 14th amendment. You can bet the dissent will.
 
My school years were spent in the USA. I was taught accordingly about the constitution across three classes and eight years. Some of what they taught turned out to be bullshit and NO ONE could explain how the draft was constitutional as it violated about four statutes as I recall.
Then you had crap teachers, or perhaps are a poor student yourself................The U.S. military draft, also known as conscription, is constitutional. The Supreme Court has upheld its legality, citing the powers granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution to raise and support armies, and to call forth the militia to execute the laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions.
I learned every weakness in the US brand, every failing, as each of the country's representatives rejected those ideas in turn.

Americans have been lied to.
No nation in history is perfect, unless the citizens are. In recent years the U.S. had a giant brain-fart and elected Trump.
 
Back
Top Bottom