Birthright citizenship’s risk, NATO’s – Latest News
Legal Scholar: Birthright Citizenship’s Threat
“Nothing is certain” concerning Trump v. Barbara, the Supreme Court case about birthright citizenship, although there are “signals” the “conservative justices are unlikely to reject” the customary studying of the 14th Amendment, observes Jonathan Turley at The Hill. While “there are good-faith arguments against” discovering a case for birthright citizenship within the Constitution, “the historical record is highly conflicted.” Descriptions of “rampant abuse” didn’t “seem to impress the conservative justices,” whilst “millions game the birthright citizenship system.” The mixture of “open borders and open-ended citizenship is an existential threat to this Republic,” however the “final word actually rests with the public”: Americans could need to “amend the Constitution to hitch most of the world in barring birthright citizenship.
Foreign desk: NATO’s Diminishing Value to US
“NATO is a problem,” argues Roger Kimball at American Greatness, and “has been a problem for some time.” The alliance “lost a large part of its raison d’être” after the Soviet Union’s collapse, and even within the ’80s critics claimed NATO “had lost its mandate.” But NATO’s “fate was sealed . . . when the US asked its European allies” for “a little consideration in its war with Iran” and was largely rebuffed once they denied overflight rights from “bases we pay for and that are there to help protect” those self same nations. “An ‘ally’ is not only a country that depends on you. It is also a country you can depend on” — but most “NATO countries are not allies in this reciprocal sense.”
More From Post Editorial Board
Iran struggle: We’re on the ‘Critical Point’
“The next two weeks” mark “the critical point” within the Iran struggle, contends Mark Penn on X. The world had let Iran turn out to be “more dangerous” than anybody realized, having amassed “an astounding” 5,000 ballistic missiles, most likely more than “the US or even Russia would have.” And the Iranians “are clearly retaining command and control leadership enough to keep firing.” Yet the US can “take out or take over their oil facilities, knock out their power and continue to dissemble their leadership.” The regime is “going to hold on,” and it’ll “take the next level of escalation” to beat it. But “US and Israeli resolve appears firm.” And the US navy proved its competence with the rescue of the downed pilot. “The odds are with the US.”
Start your day with all you need to know
Morning Report delivers the newest information, videos, pictures and more.
Thanks for signing up!
Cali beat: Even Dogs Get To Vote
“Democrats in Sacramento have sought to ease voting requirements” to the purpose the place “even pets have managed to cast ballots — or at least their owners have on their behalf,” quips The Wall Street Journal’s Allysia Finley. That’s as a result of, in California, “ID isn’t required to register or vote,” nor are officers “required to verify that a voter is a citizen or even exists.” The “canine fraud was discovered only because the woman reported herself.” The state’s “loosey-goosey” guidelines “practically invite fraud, much like its generous welfare programs.” Yet Democrats and unions oppose a “ballot initiative that would require election officials to verify voters’ citizenship.” If Democrats “win complete control of Washington, they’ll try to impose California-style lax election rules nationwide with the goal of cementing their power.”
Conservative: Midterms Might Save Mullahs
Iran’s ayatollahs know “if they can survive this threat to their reign, they will probably never face another military challenge as severe,” notes National Review’s Jim Geraghty. The Iran struggle “is likely the apex of America’s willingness to use military power in the Middle East for the foreseeable future.” Yes, “the dire state of Iran’s postwar economy may well spur another popular uprising,” which might finish the regime. But the midterm elections might tie Trump’s arms as Democrats are anticipated to win control of the House and probably, the Senate, and aren’t prone to permit one other assault. If the mullahs aren’t “driven from power,” Dems will say the struggle “was a waste of time, money, ordnance, U.S. servicemen’s lives.”
— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
