{"id":147900,"date":"2026-04-03T15:36:58","date_gmt":"2026-04-03T23:36:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/04\/03\/responses-to-justice-jacksons-birthright-citizenship-argument-show-theres-some-stupid-you-shouldnt-argue-with\/"},"modified":"2026-04-03T15:36:58","modified_gmt":"2026-04-03T23:36:58","slug":"responses-to-justice-jacksons-birthright-citizenship-argument-show-theres-some-stupid-you-shouldnt-argue-with","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/04\/03\/responses-to-justice-jacksons-birthright-citizenship-argument-show-theres-some-stupid-you-shouldnt-argue-with\/","title":{"rendered":"Responses To Justice Jackson\u2019s Birthright Citizenship Argument Show There\u2019s Some Stupid You Shouldn\u2019t Argue With"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Trump Administration\u2019s case is like a failed cold call. We all sat back and felt schadenfreude<\/s> second-hand embarrassment when Solicitor General Sauer didn\u2019t have the foresight to tee up a reply to the biggest advocate for Native sovereignty in the history of Supreme Court Justices<\/a> asking about how the administrations domicile requirement would impact Native American citizenship. But like a cold call gone bad, sometimes an instructor\u2019s brilliance seeps through and condenses high theory into an approachable, easily consumable thing. Like batteries and lasagna!<\/p>\n

If you were to asked to explain a battery, you\u2019d probably provide an example: one AAA Energizer battery suffices. But we all know that despite how useful examples can be, they aren\u2019t in themselves explanations<\/em>. Not to mention that without a clear understanding of the concepts you may give faulty examples: you could define a battery as a thing that stores energy, but that would include odd things you\u2019d want to exclude like fat reserves and uranium. What a battery is is simple: a thing that changes chemical reactions into electrical energy using an anode, cathode and an electrolyte. Or, to bring the theory back down to earth, think about a tray of lasagna! You ever prepare a tray of lasagna, cover it with aluminum foil, throw it in the oven to find out that the aluminum foil is sticking to the damn cheese? That\u2019s because you made a battery!<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

It\u2019s a simple, concrete example that drives home the essential parts of a battery and how easy they can be to make, but if someone mishandles your explanation and takes it to mean that you should try to power a Tesla with comfort food, you should take that as a sign that they\u2019re stupid and move on.<\/p>\n

Justice Jackson used a hypothetical about an American stealing in Japan to shed some light on the legal concept of \u201callegiance\u201d and dumb dumbs who didn\u2019t understand the purpose of the example are trying to spin it as some big DEI gotcha moment. You can hear her below: <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

\ud83d\udd34 DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson’s “logic”: Stealing a wallet in Japan = owing “allegiance” to Japan. <\/p>\n

This clown-level reasoning on birthright citizenship proves she’s unqualified. <\/p>\n

SCOTUS needs real justices, not quotas. Fire her. \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 #DEI<\/a> #BirthrightCitizenship<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/euWIKWgdVq<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Cypher (@TheMindCypher) April 1, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

In a case about the \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d chunk of the birthright clause, the stealing in Japan example shows, in a very common sense way, how even a non-citizen would be subject to Japan\u2019s laws penalizing theft if they stole something while they were visiting the country. Further, non-citizens would still be able to (at least in theory) employ legal avenues to get their property back via the Japanese government because of the same local allegiance, which clarifies how the \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d bit of the clause would engage with foreign nationals acting within the parameters of the US. Still, people somehow found a way to misunderstand her entirely:<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Sometimes the children left behind are grown ass adults. The funniest thing about this is that the most vocal critics have all the qualifications of being some dude in a car. Skip to about 1:24 for a big dose of weaponized ignorance:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

\ud83d\udea8 SCOTUS WORD SALAD ALERT: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson just embarrassed herself defending BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP for illegal invaders\u2019 kids!
She rambled on like a malfunctioning robot, comparing it to \u201cstealing a wallet in Japan\u201d \u2014 as if that somehow justifies turning America\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/E2Si7koxG5<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Common Sense With Z (@commonsensewz) April 2, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

Just because it didn\u2019t make sense to you<\/em> doesn\u2019t mean it didn\u2019t make sense. There are some ideas people aren\u2019t ready for; I for one am still trying to wrap my head around how gut microbiomes can effect mood and happiness<\/a>, but I also know better than to bash scientists who specialize in this because I don\u2019t understand the mechanics of a regular diet of grilled cheese sandwiches making the dark thoughts come at 3 AM. I give unto Caesar what is his and go about my lunch. Scientists enjoy a (dwindling) expertise deference that judges don\u2019t get the benefit of. It is understandable for lay people to make the mistake of thinking law is an easily accessible discipline because it really just boils down to words on a page and they can read. But there is a problem with that approach. They probably don\u2019t actually read that well \u2014 most Americans read on a 7th-8th grade reading level<\/a> which makes interpreting the Constitution a hard chestnut to crack when the Hemingway App<\/a> (admittedly not the end all be all of evaluating reading level) clocks the Constitution and the first 14 amendments at being post-graduate level. Reading well also goes further than being able to just identify words: it also factors in being able to read author intent, comparative analysis and all sorts of other things you miss when your first response to hearing Ketanji is to start bashing former President Biden. It is almost like thinking like a lawyer takes more work than listening to a sound clip and sounding off as you drive to do your errands.<\/p>\n

Tough crowd, Justice Jackson. Dumb too, but that\u2019s not polite to say. <\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . \u00a0He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boat builder who is learning to swim and is interested in rhetoric, Spinozists and humor. Getting back in to cycling wouldn\u2019t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com<\/a> and by Tweet\/Bluesky at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Responses To Justice Jackson\u2019s Birthright Citizenship Argument Show There\u2019s Some Stupid You Shouldn\u2019t Argue With<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Trump Administration\u2019s case is like a failed cold call. We all sat back and felt schadenfreude<\/s> second-hand embarrassment when Solicitor General Sauer didn\u2019t have the foresight to tee up a reply to the biggest advocate for Native sovereignty in the history of Supreme Court Justices<\/a> asking about how the administrations domicile requirement would impact Native American citizenship. But like a cold call gone bad, sometimes an instructor\u2019s brilliance seeps through and condenses high theory into an approachable, easily consumable thing. Like batteries and lasagna!<\/p>\n

If you were to asked to explain a battery, you\u2019d probably provide an example: one AAA Energizer battery suffices. But we all know that despite how useful examples can be, they aren\u2019t in themselves explanations<\/em>. Not to mention that without a clear understanding of the concepts you may give faulty examples: you could define a battery as a thing that stores energy, but that would include odd things you\u2019d want to exclude like fat reserves and uranium. What a battery is is simple: a thing that changes chemical reactions into electrical energy using an anode, cathode and an electrolyte. Or, to bring the theory back down to earth, think about a tray of lasagna! You ever prepare a tray of lasagna, cover it with aluminum foil, throw it in the oven to find out that the aluminum foil is sticking to the damn cheese? That\u2019s because you made a battery!<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

It\u2019s a simple, concrete example that drives home the essential parts of a battery and how easy they can be to make, but if someone mishandles your explanation and takes it to mean that you should try to power a Tesla with comfort food, you should take that as a sign that they\u2019re stupid and move on.<\/p>\n

Justice Jackson used a hypothetical about an American stealing in Japan to shed some light on the legal concept of \u201callegiance\u201d and dumb dumbs who didn\u2019t understand the purpose of the example are trying to spin it as some big DEI gotcha moment. You can hear her below: <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

\ud83d\udd34 DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson’s “logic”: Stealing a wallet in Japan = owing “allegiance” to Japan. <\/p>\n

This clown-level reasoning on birthright citizenship proves she’s unqualified. <\/p>\n

SCOTUS needs real justices, not quotas. Fire her. \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 #DEI<\/a> #BirthrightCitizenship<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/euWIKWgdVq<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Cypher (@TheMindCypher) April 1, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

In a case about the \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d chunk of the birthright clause, the stealing in Japan example shows, in a very common sense way, how even a non-citizen would be subject to Japan\u2019s laws penalizing theft if they stole something while they were visiting the country. Further, non-citizens would still be able to (at least in theory) employ legal avenues to get their property back via the Japanese government because of the same local allegiance, which clarifies how the \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d bit of the clause would engage with foreign nationals acting within the parameters of the US. Still, people somehow found a way to misunderstand her entirely:<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Sometimes the children left behind are grown ass adults. The funniest thing about this is that the most vocal critics have all the qualifications of being some dude in a car. Skip to about 1:24 for a big dose of weaponized ignorance:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

\ud83d\udea8 SCOTUS WORD SALAD ALERT: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson just embarrassed herself defending BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP for illegal invaders\u2019 kids!
She rambled on like a malfunctioning robot, comparing it to \u201cstealing a wallet in Japan\u201d \u2014 as if that somehow justifies turning America\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/E2Si7koxG5<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Common Sense With Z (@commonsensewz) April 2, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

Just because it didn\u2019t make sense to you<\/em> doesn\u2019t mean it didn\u2019t make sense. There are some ideas people aren\u2019t ready for; I for one am still trying to wrap my head around how gut microbiomes can effect mood and happiness<\/a>, but I also know better than to bash scientists who specialize in this because I don\u2019t understand the mechanics of a regular diet of grilled cheese sandwiches making the dark thoughts come at 3 AM. I give unto Caesar what is his and go about my lunch. Scientists enjoy a (dwindling) expertise deference that judges don\u2019t get the benefit of. It is understandable for lay people to make the mistake of thinking law is an easily accessible discipline because it really just boils down to words on a page and they can read. But there is a problem with that approach. They probably don\u2019t actually read that well \u2014 most Americans read on a 7th-8th grade reading level<\/a> which makes interpreting the Constitution a hard chestnut to crack when the Hemingway App<\/a> (admittedly not the end all be all of evaluating reading level) clocks the Constitution and the first 14 amendments at being post-graduate level. Reading well also goes further than being able to just identify words: it also factors in being able to read author intent, comparative analysis and all sorts of other things you miss when your first response to hearing Ketanji is to start bashing former President Biden. It is almost like thinking like a lawyer takes more work than listening to a sound clip and sounding off as you drive to do your errands.<\/p>\n

Tough crowd, Justice Jackson. Dumb too, but that\u2019s not polite to say. <\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord\u2122 in the Facebook group\u00a0Law School Memes for Edgy T14s . \u00a0He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boat builder who is learning to swim and is interested in rhetoric, Spinozists and humor. Getting back in to cycling wouldn\u2019t hurt either. You can reach him by email at christopherrashadwilliams@gmail.com<\/a> and by Tweet\/Bluesky at\u00a0@WritesForRent<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Responses To Justice Jackson\u2019s Birthright Citizenship Argument Show There\u2019s Some Stupid You Shouldn\u2019t Argue With<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Trump Administration\u2019s case is like a failed cold call. We all sat back and felt schadenfreude second-hand embarrassment when Solicitor General Sauer didn\u2019t have the foresight to tee up a reply to the biggest advocate for Native sovereignty in the history of Supreme Court Justices asking about how the administrations domicile requirement would impact […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":147901,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-147900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Chris-Williams-2025-ZPKxTc.jpg?fit=512%2C288&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147900","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=147900"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147900\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/147901"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=147900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=147900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=147900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}