SCOTUS

Look how happy these justices are at the confirmation ceremony :)

Attached: saysalot.png (650x359, 416K)

They all showed up, giving the ceremony some much-needed legitimacy. I can’t fault them for that.

Ginsberg can barely hold her head up anymore

She's truly a national disgrace. People of America: DO SOMETHING!

Everybody silently hates the stupid loud nigger.

>They do this every time

Attached: 161020131621-clarence-thomas-super-169.jpg (1100x619, 152K)

Look at that snarling fucking kike, lmao. Look at her teeth. "I'll get you foah diss, you doity Anti-Semitic dogs!"

>fascist larper doesn't recognize the most fascist justice on the court

>The virgin Ginsburg vs. the Chad Thomas

Attached: image.jpg (1024x653, 113K)

Watch carefully.

Attached: 1539056952593.gif (600x338, 3.18M)

Shut the fuck up faggot Thomas is the most conservative voice on the SCOTUS

Attached: image.jpg (517x491, 83K)

>tfw no old black fat guy to laugh at an old jew with

Attached: image.jpg (1024x683, 98K)

>“I take this office with gratitude and no bitterness. On the Supreme Court, I will seek to be a force for stability and unity,” Kavanaugh said. “I was not appointed to serve one party or one interest, but to serve one nation.”

Based Kav

Of course Clarence Thomas is happy, the media and democrats did basically the same exact bullshit to him that they did to Kav and they lost again.

Ginsberg does not look healthy

How can you say you hate African Americans but worship the BBC of Clarence Thomas? You fuckface republican retards are hypocrites.

fucking kek

90% of Jow Forums are aspiring honorary whites

Retard

Shut up man she's fine!

Attached: image.jpg (750x591, 99K)

t. Jew

Did you not read the rare case of Black v Nigger?

Attached: image.jpg (500x419, 47K)

;)

Anyone who talks shit about based Clarence Thomas is a shill

based

With a 5-4 majority, I sure hope the SCOTUS will reconfirm the original intent of the 14th amendment.

Green wall of text = part of pic.

>The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.

>Over a century ago, the Supreme Court appropriately confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called "Slaughter-House cases" [83 US 36 (1873) and 112 US 94 (1884)]13. In the 1884 Elk v.Wilkins case12, the phrase "subject to its jurisdiction" was interpreted to exclude "children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States."

The Court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the child. To qualify children for birthright citizenship, based on the 14th Amendment, parents must owe "direct and immediate allegiance" to the U.S. and be "completely subject" to its jurisdiction. In other words, they must be United States citizens.

>In 1898, the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case10,11, 16 once again, in a ruling based strictly on the 14th Amendment, concluded that the status of the parents was crucial in determining the citizenship of the child. The current misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment is based in part upon the presumption that the Wong Kim Ark ruling encompassed illegal aliens. In fact, it did not address the children of illegal aliens and non-immigrant aliens, but rather determined an allegiance for legal immigrant parents based on the meaning of the word domicil(e). Since it is inconceivable that illegal alien parents could have a legal domicile in the United States, the ruling clearly did not extend birthright citizenship to children of illegal alien parents. Indeed, the ruling strengthened the original intent of the 14th Amendment.

Attached: 14th.jpg (636x2984, 2.09M)

Checked and kekd