I am not a great fan of the lawyer Neal Katyal who I find rather intentionally naive about his fellow lawyers in so many instances.* But he did make a good point about Trump going the birther lie way about Kamala Harris, who is clearly, by legal definition and any common sense, non-racist one a natural born citizen of the United States. Trump doing that as a lying media racist and candidate for president is one thing, but he had not taken an oath to defend and protect the Constitution of which the articles and amendments that support Kamala Harris's citizenship and eligibility to be Vice President are a part makes him doing the racist flaming Newsweek thing a violation of his oath of office and, in an honest Senate, would be grounds for his conviction and removal from office. Of course we don't have one of those so he's not going to be removed.
This is exactly why a politician such as Kamala Harris should be able to sue toilet paper like Newsweek (as it is now) and a pro-racist like Eastman for libel and slander. This happening is a direct result of the Supreme Court making it absurdly permissible for them to lie like the North Korean media with total impunity. And it's a permission that has been mastered by the American-fascist party, the Republicans in the way that even an intelligently decided decision made in good faith will be. When it is as stupid as the line of "free speech-press" decisions that are being used to destroy democracy the court did most of that work for them. Including the "liberal" Warren Court that started it.
* I'm not giving a link but the "point-counterpoint" style BS "other side" posted as further ass cover by Newsweek, by a UCLA law prof refuting the clear lies of his "friend" who set off birther 2.0 is a good example of the type, pretending the good faith of what was a blatantly dishonest and hypocritical act to sabotage Kamala Harris based in an appeal to racism. Lawyers who have the backs of their worst colleagues are pretty useless when all of the points are considered.
I don't trust lawyers who are "good friends" with the fascists among them. They're like the "liberal" lawyers and judges who assued us that Alito was going to be a fair and impartial judge of the law and the merits of the case, a lie that everyone in the friggin' audience knew was a lie and those legal-liars lied it anyway. Most of the contempt I've developed for lawyers, with some exceptions, is a result of that kind of collegial hypocrisy and professional mutual self-interest.
I feel I should put this in simple terms: the "lawyer" who wrote that Newsweek op-ed claiming the Ark decision does not establish a jus soli (soil, not blood) citizenship standard for America is so far out in left field (or right, I guess) he stands alone. His is not a considered legal opinion, it's an outlier, a microdot of an island somewhere in the legal Pacific. He stands alone, and his opinion means nothing.
ReplyDeleteExcept to racists and other vermin, who populate this administration in very large numbers. Frankly, I see it as a motivator to get young people to vote out the Racist-in-Chief.