>>179952, >>179953, >>179954, >>179955, >>179956, >>179957, >>179958, >>179959, >>179960, >>179961, >>179962, >>179963, >>179964, >>179965, >>179966, >>179967, >>179968, >>179969, >>179970, >>179971, >>179972, >>179973, >>179974, >>179975, >>179976, >>179977, >>179978, >>179979, >>179980, >>179981, >>179982, >>179983, >>179984, >>179985, >>179986, >>179987, >>179988, >>179989, >>179990, >>179991, >>179992, >>179993, >>179994, >>179995, >>179996, >>179997, >>179998, >>179999, >>180000, >>180001, >>180002, >>180003, >>180004, >>180005
Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow - THE SUPREME COURT'S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP HEARING
I've been working on a few exciting projects (for the future), but here's my quick take: This is actually a very simple case but made messy for the justices. 90% of the time the justices spent asking questions/making statements that had absolutely no relevance to the 14th amendment but were result-oriented attempts at justifying birthright citizenship. There were comments about administration, policy, English common law, etc. But anyone who can read and comprehend the civil rights act in 1866 that preceded the amendment, the debates surrounding the act, and the subsequent draft and debate around the 14th amendment would know full well that the amendment never -- in any way -- contemplated granting birthright citizenship to foreigners, let alone illegal aliens. It would have been unimaginable. In fact, it was not intended to be an immigration amendment. It was passed by Congress and ratified by the states to enshrine in the Constitution and across all states the treatment of newly freed slaves and their children as citizens after the Civil War, and because certain states refused to acknowledge their citizenship. Indeed, President Andrew Johnson had vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, his veto was overridden, but that was the impetus for the constitutional amendment.
The language -- "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" -- had a specific meaning and intent. As explained years ago by me and others, this refers to the political allegiance to the United States and is derived from the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which extended citizenship to the freed slaves and their children. Again, to underscore, it had nothing to do with immigration at all. Therefore, foreigners who come into the United States illegally cannot confer upon themselves "jurisdiction" for the purposes of granting citizenship to their babies because they were born in our country.
https://x.com/marklevinshow/status/2039822456282660908

Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow - Inside Iran’s ruling ideology: How a ‘holy mission’ and messianic doctrine fuel regime extremism
https://www.foxnews.com/world/inside-irans-ruling-ideology-how-holy-mission-messianic-doctrine-fuel-regime-extremism
https://x.com/marklevinshow/status/2040981532022575141

Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow - Get lost already, Qatarlson. Lunatic.
Quote:
James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames
We're watching the end of the Woke Right op, actually.
https://x.com/marklevinshow/status/2040980357390975410

Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow - My opening statement tonight on Life, Liberty & Levin