BREAKING NEWS: A Tale Of Two Courts

One that uphold the Constitution and one that worms its way around the Constitutional question!

First the upholding of the Constitution...

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s attempt to limit birthright citizenship

The Trump administration sought to upend the historical understanding of the 14th Amendment  which has long been interpreted to extend birthright citizenship broadly.

NBC News

By Lawrence Hurley

June 30, 2026

The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump’s contentious attempt to limit citizenship at birth for those born on U.S. soil, delivering a major blow to his agenda.

The court, divided 6-3, ruled that the executive order Trump issued Jan. 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, was unlawful. Five justices said the order fell foul of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which has long been interpreted to bestow birthright citizenship on almost anyone born in the United States.

One justice, conservative Brett Kavanaugh, said the order violated federal law but not the Constitution.

Here is the Amendment...

AMENDMENT XIV

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Do you see any qualifiers is the amendment?

Questions are undocumented immigrants being arrested and going to trial? The answer is "Yes" so therefore they are subject to the laws of the United States... Period. No "buts" nor "ifs"  But somehow three Supreme Court justice see words that are not written in the amendment. They say,

Three conservatives would have ruled in Trump’s favor, saying that the 14^th Amendment  would allow his executive order: Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.

In dissent, Thomas wrote that the 14th Amendment was primarily aimed at formerly enslaved Black people.

“Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority,” he wrote. “The same could not be said for the children of foreign temporary visitors.”

Bull S**t! In 1886 the Supreme Court ruled that in the case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins that the 14^th Amendment did apply to other people besides Blacks. The case of Truax v. Raich in 1915 rules the Supreme Court struck it down, holding that lawful resident aliens are "persons" protected by the Equal Protection Clause.

So the conservatives justices cherry picked their case for rebuttal!

The Fourteenth Amendment also covers equal treatment. In another NBC article they write,

The court, largely divided 6-3, ruled against two transgender students, Becky Pepper-Jackson and Lindsay Hecox, who had challenged restrictive laws in West Virginia and Idaho, respectively.

The court in an opinion authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh concluded that the laws do not violate either the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which requires that the law apply evenly to everyone, or Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bars sex discrimination in education.

“The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America,” Kavanaugh wrote.

He expressed sympathy for transgender girls and women who desire to play sports, saying “their desire to compete warrants respect” and that they should not be “ostracized or vilified.”

But they did!

It is the latest in a string of defeats for transgender people at the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority.

In the cases the Supreme Court justices in the cases of cases, West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox ruled that 14th Amendment to the Constitution, nor Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 apply to trans people. In their ruling they only looked the central legal question under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was whether laws that separate athletic participation based on biological sex unlawfully deny transgender girls equal protection.

Okay you get that? The question before the court wasn't if trans people were being discriminated against but rather if the law that the separation of athletic participation based on biological sex is Constitutional.  And to that I have to agree... however, the court did not answer the question if we can play sports in our true gender. That question still hasn't been answered.

There is also some hope in that it only applies to states with the bans. Not to states like Connecticut that allows trans sports. It does not effect all the states just the states that ban us.

So the the question if we can play in our true genders have not been answered.