LyrArc Article Gist
Birthright Citizenship Case at the Supreme Court of the US.- Arguments live from Courtroom at SCOTUS. History shows that much of the 19th and 20th century was spent keeping Asians out of the US, even the Chinese who built the railroads. One of the Chinese whose parents came to the US Wong Kim asked to stay and the Supreme Court ruled in that individual and single isolated case in 1898 that he could stay. Only after JFK and LBJ was immigration gradually opened to Chinese and Indians and Asians in general. By the end of the 20th century this went to the other extreme from no Asians allowed to birthright citizenship for Asian mothers to obtain citizenship in this way just by arriving in New York, clearly with no justification. Even Britain abandoned this idea of birthright citizenship in 1981,  with parentage required uder a new law, one parent citizenship required, 10 years of residence required. Even this relevant fact was not cited by the Solicitor General of the US when he presented the case to the Court in opening summary on April 1, 2026. With Britain removing itself from this practice, it makes no sense to practice birthright citizenship as there is such thing as the Republican view of this- it is the universal view now of all civilized modern nations. With one or two exceptions for unique reasons ( a largely unpopulated country) such as Canada, which may also amend this law. The fact that Asians were not allowed for a century even after some "coolies" built the railroads in the US does not mean it is now time to go to the other extreme to welcome all who come even under the most egregious means. Asians themselves will recognize and support this, now that the "coolie" culture and colonialism is long gone and Asians are part of the fabric of this country. None of this will be mentioned at the Supreme Court just esoteric argument around what a term was accidentally inserted in the case for the one Chinese admitted under that case in 1898 - "Under the jurisdiction thereof." And lawyers will argue around technical points, one more reason for the public disbelief in the SCOTUS. Yet most Asians can be grateful for the process initiated by JFK and LBJ that opened up lawful immigration to the US for Asians, and have the curiosity and eagerness to learn the history of this new Nation and its boundless energies that reshaped our world, to learn about its European heritage and cultures, not ask for more such as birthright citizenship. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The SCOTUS views in questioning on the Birthright Citizenship Case April 2026- Roberts, Gorsuch, Thomas and Alito. Roberts seemed to agree with the 1898 Wong decision by the Court that children of people not allowed to legally reside in the US are not citizens of the US when it was presented at the Court by Solicitor General Sauer.

LyrArc Article Gist
Cecilia Wang of Taiwanese parents with student visas in the 1970's calls it an 128 year American tradition, but is it really the case that it was one individual case for Chinese immigrant Wang Kim in 1998 case before the US Supreme Court where it made sense for the Court to let Wang Kim stay, just as it makes sense for someone in the country for over 10 years to stay in Britain. Birthright citizenship is something else entirely and history shows that forget birthright citizenship for Asians- for most of the 19th century and over half of the twentieth century till the 1960's American public and Congress opposed any form of immigration from Asia. It was only under John F. Kennedy who was Irish, had served in the Pacific in Asia, that the idea of giving Asians citizenship was given credibility and acceptance with the American public and in the US Congress.  Without JFK and LBJ this opening for Asian immigrants coming legally in large numbers for education would never have happened, not under Nixon-Ford-Reagan-Bush. And the modernization of Asia, of Japan, China, now India could not have happened without knowledge of new technologies in American universities gathered by these visitors who were also allowed to work and stay legally. For this reason common sense is a more valuable way to approach this. Misuse and misrepresentation would only create the feeling that Asian Americans- who have integrated into the fabric of America and whose sons and daughters have benefitted the most from the gracious invitation of JFK and LBJ- who are mostly highly educated and can draw on the best economic opportunities the Nation has to offer, want to see their own interests only, and not the Nation as a whole as it struggles to bring a improvement in the lives of the have-nots in today's society, the less educated, the low income workers often immigrants from Latin American countries, those struggling to make ends meet in this economy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift." The 14th Amendment was a repudiation of infamous Dred Scott decision and stood up for rights of black people, at no time was it intended to bring mothers from Asia or Africa to the US to get automatic citizenship for a child. 255,000 mothers a year with no connections to the US arrive here for automatic bithright citizenship- US Supreme Court rules "no" June 27 2025, and objects to mothers filing the lawsuits for their children when the mother has no legal status. Justice Coney Barrett in a 6-3 decision says the district courts cannot make laws over the decisions of the executive branch for the whole country as they have tried to do till now. This means birthright citizenship executive branch decision cannot be overruled across the nation. Most of the lawsuits are filed in states favorable to this or that approach.  In a few months the Supreme Court will address the automatic birthright citizenship issue at its core. Can a mother come to the US just to get her child US citizenship coming on a visitor visa. Much of the nation sees this as belittling the value of US citizenship.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Pregnant women should not be bringing lawsuits for getting birthright citizenship for their children says the US Supreme Court in June 2025. Judge Coney Barrett says in 6-3 deicsion of the SC that district courts cannot rule beyond their state on birthright citizenship or act as a decider on executive branch decisions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Cecilia Wang is herself a birthright citizen from parents on student visas from Taiwan hence her views reflect her position before the the Court on DJT Executive Order.  She says the admission of Wang Kim in an 1898 case to US citizenship is a 128 American tradition when history shows very little sentiment in the American public and in the US Congress favoring legal immigration of any form from Asia (Japan, China and India). In fact a deal made by Teddy Roosevelt with Japan included an understanding with the Japanese government in the 1900's that Japan would restrict immigration from Japan to the US. Throughout the period 1850-1960 for 110 years one finds very little immigration of Asians to the US- mostly European selectively in phases after 1900 by steamboat as can be seen at the Smithsonian museum exhibits in Washington DC. Thus the Court is taking up a narrative that was never true. It was only JFK and LBJ who changed this by the 1960's- if one reads JFK and his grasp of the events in Indonesia, India, of Asia in WWII from his experiences as a soldier in the Asia Pacific region- not as the narrative suggests as an extension of civil rights for Black people, but for a deep respect and understanding of Asian people's aspirations that he opened up immigration to the US in the 1960's for Asians. This is why it is a stretch of the imagination for Cecilia Wang to say- Cecilia Wang -"your ancestors could be on the Mayflower or be undocumented immigrants but you and I are exactly the same as US citizens." Even after 60 years of reading the speeches and writing of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, TR and FDR, JFK, of Carl Sandburg's volumes of Lincoln, the poetry of America of Walt Whitman, committing Robert Frost poems to memory, there is more a sense of humility and even greater earnest  desire to learn about this Nation, and of the scientific endeavors of Europe since 1600 that eluded Asia, than making statements about the first voyages and the people who ventured out on the Mayflower. One has to look with awe at the sculptures in Geneva, Switzerland, of these brave people in the 1600's who for religious and other reasons made their way in difficult voyages over the Atlantic to America, much less say were the same as them. It is more about honoring JFK's words in appreciation of his opening for Asia, on thinking more about what you can do for your country than what your country can do for you. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The DJT Executive Order removing birthright citizenship on Jan 20, 2024 applies to future undocumented immigrants, and is based on the part of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution passed in 1866 by the US Congress and ratified by states in 1868.  The 14th Amendment came after the US Civil War and was aimed at giving emancipated black slaves citizenship. The US Supreme Court gave US citizenship to one Chinese immigrant in US vs Wong in 1898 following the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This did not set a precedent as at that time immigration from Asia was extremely restricted and the case was not intended to apply to millions crossing borders as this did not exist. For most of the period 1900-1960 Asian immigration was negligible because of the laws in existence until the Kennedy administration. Immigration from Mexico was mainly for US agricultural farms. When this led to a surge in illegal crossing of the US Mexican border in 1944-1954 a similar situation to today existed when Eisenhower conducted Operation Wetback in 1954 to deport about 1 million undocumented immigrants. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Going forward, it will “be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female,” DJT said. Executive orders ending automatic birthright citizenship and DEI programs.  Automatic birthright citizenship is not in the Constitution signed on Sept 17 1787, and ratified by the states by June 1788. What was added in the 14th Amendment of 1868 was intended solely to give black people freed from slavery after the Civil War the rights of citizenship. It had nothing to do with millions of people illegally crossing American borders from foreign countries or people coming to the US to gain citizenship by giving birth here. The US vs Wong decision of 1898 came 6 years after the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1892 giving Wong Kim a Chinese born in the US in 1873 rights as a citizen. From 1882 Chinese who build the railroads were kept out of the country under Chinese Exclusion Act till Kennedy in the 1960- as policy applied to all Asians- making it a mystery how the SC decision of 1898 gives automatic birthright citizenship to people of foreign countries born in the US.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Britain, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand have redefined citizenship so that it is along blood lines, and not birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment of the US Constitution was passed by Congress in 1866 and ratified by the States in 1868. It uses the words-"All persons born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction therof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."  The US Supreme Court will have to interpret this language and intent of the Amendment whether they intended it to apply to children of unauthorized migrants coming illegally into the country. At the time it was passed after the Civil War it was intended to emancipate freed black slaves and give children of freed slaves citizenship and rights. Congress, the States and the Supreme Court will have to consider whether the situation intended to be addressed in 14th Amendment was slavery and not the refugees and economic driven illegal migrants flowing in at the rate of 1-2 million a year as happened in 2021-2023. The Supreme Court in its Wong Kim Ark decision in 1898 supported the 14th Amendment at a time when illegal entry into the US was a tiny fraction of what it is today.   The 14th Amendment included under Section 4 on Debt the words- "Neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void." The 14th Amendment was  in its intent designed to complete the work of the Civil War to free black slaves and give them the rights of citizenship. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution Section 1 says- "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." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What did the Justices say about US Birthright Citizenship? Here are the words of what the Justices said in the June 27 decision of the US Supreme Court 6-3 blocking the district courts from overruling the Executive Order of the US president. From the outset the Justices sought to decide - was the district court in a state deciding on a case with individual circumstances for the plaintiffs, even by a stretch of the imagination going to decide over the judgement of the Executive Branch what the law of the land should be? SC went though British law, and US law during its history and found no such understanding of the courts. "In each case, the District Court entered a “universal injunction”—an injunction barring executive officials from applying the Executive Order to anyone, not just the plaintiffs. And in each case, the Court of Appeals denied the Government’s request to stay the sweeping relief. The Government argues that the District Courts lacked equitable authority to impose universal relief and has filed three nearly identical emergency applications seeking partial stays to limit the preliminary injunctions to the plaintiffs in each case." The Court held- "Held: Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts. The Court grants the Government’s applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
District court Judges are the first tier of the three tiered system of judiciary power. A series of US District Judge rulings stop the federal payments system, birthright citizenship, federal employees offered buyout plan, and other executive orders issued by DJT in first 72 hours in office. They were all designed to cut the federal bureuacracy in the US and gut agencies with overspending such as USAID $40 billion when rural America's needs are unmet, and tackle birthright citizenship which allows mothers to fly into the US and depart just to get citizenship for children. The White House plans to appeal these rulings to the next level the appellate courts in the US, all the way to the US Supreme Court. Some of the arguments against USAID $40 billion budget was that it funded bureaucrats pet projects, something that Senators such as Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky have fought against for 25 years. Coming after trillions of dollars in spending under the infrastructure Investment Act oversight over such spending is in the American tradition. No less than Harry Truman as Senator from Missouri made his mark by tracking down overspending and waste, during the Second World War. Another problem not discussed enough is that in today's world more can be done with good governance and leadership, avoiding unneeded wars, and investment from India, China, EU and US than can be done with $40 billion spread thinly over the whole world. Sri Lanka is just one example where its undoing is waging ethnic war, corruption, and India is leading its recovery in ways that USAID could never do. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT executive orders include one ending birthright citizenship. “It was really meant for children of slaves." DJT is referring to the 14th Amendment that was passed in 1868 by Congress and ratified by 1868 by the states. It came after the Civil War and Emancipation of slaves and was intended without any doubt for one and only one purpose to make slaves citizens of the United States Look at Section 4 of the 14th Amendment which says the United States will not allow any claim for the loss of any slave. "But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. The only SC decision in US vs Wong Kim that gave citizenship in 1898 to Wong Kim was not intended to go beyond that particular case, it was only meant to make an exception to the Chinese Exclusion Act  of 1882 after which till 1960 (JFK's election) Chinese immigration to the US was stopped, and the same for all Asians. Only immigrant labor allowed in was from Mexico for agriculture till 1960. And in 1954 Operation Wetback wwas conducted by Eisenhower to return about 1 million illegal immigrants to Mexico. DJT says- “It was not meant for everyone to come into our country by airplane, or charging across the borders from all over the world and think they’re going to become citizens.” The millions that came illegally across land border  and the flow of drugs is a new situation that Congress and the Supreme Court are only facing since 2014 a period in which wars in Afghanistan and Iraq took time and resources away from problems at home. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Venezuelan illegal immigrant lawsuit reaches US Supreme Court for birthright citizenship. What did the US Supreme Court rule? Alongside we provide the summary of the US Supreme Court landmark decision which is coming in two parts, this being just the first. Simply stated the US SC ruled that district courts can give the plaintiffs relief in their individual circumstances but do not have the authority to extend this to into a "universal injunction." Three states and a Venezuelan illegal immigrant allowed into the US under the asylum policy make the case. And each case may have individual merits but does it apply to a whole geopolitical event? Yet the sheer numbers, the scale running into millions of people, amounting to it being an invasion, a geopolitical event resulting from Bush-Obama-Trump-Biden failures to assert the Monroe Doctrine and prevent intervention by foreign, specifically European powers in the affairs of the American continent. Yet at no point in the administration of the last 9 years has this situation been anticipated or this situation been singled out as one that no asylum policy of any nation is designed to tackle. The efforts to fix things as far away as the mountains of the Hindu Kush have frittered away the important resources of the US military to maintain the Monroe Doctrine. It can be said that the basic error was not to see president Monroe's policy for what it was - an effort to prevent the French, the Spanish or some other European power to bring back colonial rule or in some ways unsettle the affairs on this continent. The US Supreme Court is aware of the surroundings of this event as it takes up the issues of immigration and efforts by foreign powers to unsettle the fabric of the Nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"Favorable" District courts are now being used to support illegal migration into the US that was rejected in the 2024 election. A District Court in DC makes a ruling on ending asylum "invasion" of US southern border, by questioning that millions of illegal migrants entering in one year alone is an "invasion." Even though it is publicly known that over 2.4 million people crossed the US southern border in fiscal year 2023. These District Court rulings are being given high priority by the US Supreme Court.  In the most recent ruling from last week the SC stated in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Coney Barrett on birthright citizenship that the law on the lawsuits can apply to the individual case not  be converted into a national injunction.  The situation of asylum seeking deteriorated in three ways, the Mexican government of president Lopez Obrador, Alejandro Mayorkas as Biden's selection for Homeland Security, himself an immigrant from Cuba, and the Biden administration not grasping the true extent of the crisis at the southern border with the unsettled situation in central America and the economic disaster in Venezuela. For the first time in the 400 year history of this hemisphere since the Spanish colonization by 1600 and American independence by 1800 the ideas of the Monroe Doctrine of the US protecting this hemisphere were ignored leading to the disastrous situation at the US borders, leading to fentanyl and illegal migration of such proportions. As a result of the election of 2024 and the public view of illegal migration the DJT administration is taking the approach taken by president Eisenhower in 1952 in Operation Wetback, seeking to return illegal migrants to their home countries.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In the first week of the his administration DJT plans to end birthright citizenship by executive order. He will work with Democrats to protect Dreamers who he says are middle aged people by now and do not even speak the language of their country, as children brought to the US by their parents. He will pardon Jan. 6 defendents in the attack on the Capitol on the first day.

DJT says he will not act to replace the head of the US Federal Reserve Bank, though he plans to replace FBI Director Wray, who he says "invaded my home." 

DJT says-

“I’m really looking to make our country successful. I’m not looking to go back into the past. I’m looking to make our country successful. Retribution will be through success.”

 

LyrArc Article Gist
The Nation is faced with another Supreme Court decision as in 1868 for the 14th Amendment, in 2025 on birthright citizenship.  The 14th Amendment was written in the 19th century it had no concept of the 20th century and absolutely no idea of the 21st century we live in, unable to even conceive of conditions today, or even think of  setting rules for immigration today. It rejected the Dredd Scott decision of 1857 denying black people rights as citizens, restating the law of the land, had nothing at all to do with stating the opinion of the Judiciary on whether a mother flying in from Asia could secure US citizenship for a new born child by merely visiting the US. As in 1857, in 2025 the law is based on assumed historical facts as Lincoln said on Dredd Scott decision, that are not really true. Lincoln said in 1857- "That burlesque upon judicial decisions, and slander and profanation upon the honored names, and sacred history of republican America must be overruled, and expunged from the books of authority." The 14th Amendment was written to give black people the rights of citizens of the US, in a complete repudiation of the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court of 1857 that deprived black people of rights as citizens because Judge Tanney said the British Empire had set up the institution of slavery in the American colonies and the British were responsible for the institution, little we can do about it. When by 1807 slavery was being banned in Britain and in 1838 totally banned in the British Empire. It created the idea that Americans were not the master of their destinies after the departure of the British to choose which institutions they would keep and which they would reject including slavery. Abraham Lincoln citing President Andrew Jackson said each the executive, the judiciary, Congress, and the common man were entitled to their own view of the US Constitution as they understood it. Lincoln also said Judge Tanney's decision in Dred Scott case was based on assumed historical facts that were not really true- Judge Tanney making no mention of the fact that in 1857 the British Empire had already abolished the institution for 50 years. The DJT Executive Order banning birthright citizenship shown here on the White House site has the title- Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship. It is written in  simple language in 1 page -Purpose, Policy, Enforcement and Definitions, Provisions.  The purpose clearly states that the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court in 1857 is what the framers of the 14th Amendment had in mind when they drafted the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. A reading of the 14th Amendment makes this abundantly clear. The wording comes out at the outset reversing the Dredd Scott Decision of 1857. It's repudiation was why the Northern and Southern States fought the Civil War. The National Archives say that with Dred Scott decision to allow the spread of slavery to American territories in the West,  America moved one step closer to civil war. With such  momentous events in the history of the US 1857-1868 the framers of the 14th Amendment were not sitting down to write rules about what was right for America a century and a half later.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ points out the dangers to the Republican party in taking the stand on immigraton along the lines suggested by Donald Trump in August 2015- deportation for all illegal immigrants, no birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants, and no remittances allowed for illegal immigrants to their home countries. It points out that remittances actually improve the economies of the countries south of the U.S. border in Latin America and reduce illegal immigration. There is a need for seasonal workers in farm areas where there is a severe shortage of workers even at $17 an hour. Reducing immigration is better accomplished by more guest worker programs. A likely result would be the move of farms and factories to regions with low cost labor in Latin America or other countries. For the Republican Party this type of policy would bring back the period of the 1920's, says the WSJ, when Irish and Italian immigration was opposed by the party, alienating the two ethnic groups till they were won back in the Reagan period- a sure way to lose in 2016....

LyrArc Article Gist
Fact check looks at the facts and what candidates claimed happened. Jeb Bush is right says fact check about the casinos Trump tried to get started in Florida. Fiorina overstates what she accomplished at H-P. Kasich is largely right about fixing the finances in Ohio. Trump is wrong about the U.S. being the only country with birthright citizenship- there are 30 countries according to The Center for Immigration Studies. Trump throws the number out of $200 billion, as what it is costing the U.S. for illegal immigrants. An estimate by The Federation for American Immigration Reform put this at $113 billion a year in welfare programs. From this one has to deduct what illegal immigrants pay in payroll taxes to get a good estimate. Trump says he never went bankrupt, he means not him personally- his companies have filed for bankruptcy Chapter 11 protection. Considering how many times Trump has misstated, it would be useful if the network broadcasting the debate would have an independent company do the fact check at the same time as the misstatements are thrown around, and show this on the bottom of the screen or during the advertising breaks, because it is very important to viewers to get the right information. In our opinionated partisan environment it is important to let candidates know that they cannot get away with it by misstating facts, over and over again....

LyrArc Article Gist
In a major western nation the Shadow Government is now being led by someone who did not spend childhood years growing up in that country, putting this out of reach for millions of children whose parents and grandparents have lived there for generations. The result is that the common people are losing faith in government. In that major western nation people are deserting the main parties looking for alternatives and common sense even though the laws on birthright citizenship were finally and belatedly changed in 1983. US vs Wong Kim Supreme Court case of 1898 is about Wong as a son of parents lawfully and permanently domiciled in the country, and was seen by the Supreme Court as a natural born child for good reason. That this does not apply to women coming to a western country to give birth specifically to gain citizenship for a child and then departing appears obvious. Just one year after a mother from West Africa arrived along with others who made the same journey from around the world to give birth for citizenship in the UK, the UK changed its laws to prevent this from happening again. In the US as it seeks to  follow other countries in Europe to prevent birthright citizenship used in opportunistic ways not inherent in genuine citizenship, this jurisdiction does not apply to people here illegally or temporarily.   The authors of this article in WSJ say temporarily as understood by ephemeral jurisdiction. They cite the citizenship clause.Sen. Jacob Howard (R., Mich.), sponsored the Citizenship Clause. Senator Jacob Howard argued that it “ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States.”    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The pent up energy from 4 years in the Opposition and the preparation made in the months before the election for the first days in office are reasons cited for the speed in which executive orders were issued on the first day. Another reason is that the president's popularity is high following the election in November and it is likely to slip in the months ahead leading to possible loss of one or both the Senate and the House of Representatives in the midterms of 2026. The president signed executive orders to declare a national emergency at the US Border, to designate gangs and drug traffickers as terrorist organizations, end birthright citizenship, as actions to deliver for the 87% of people in the Pew Research poll and similar numbers in NYT poll who want the US Border and immigration under control. Other actions were about the fentanyl flows from China, Mexico and Canada, not enough is being done by these countries causing 105,000 deaths in 2023 and 107,000 deaths in 2022 alone. When the Vietnam War led to 60,000 deaths there was a huge outcry, nowadays heads of responding agencies have no serious answers, the nation is not in a uproar as it should be. This is what the tariffs are about and this is why the American people do not see tariffs in the way they were used in beggar thy neighbor policy during the Hoover administration of the 1930's. Cities such as Baltimore are hardest hit. Almost every county in America is hit from Knox County Tennessee, Multnomah Oregon, San Francisco California, Camden NJ, Bronx NY, Bernalillo New Mexico, Jefferson Alabama, Philadelphia Pennsylvania, Washington DC, Jefferson Kentucky, Denver Colorado, Milwaukee Wisconsin, Jefferson Alabama, Bernalillo New Mexico, Camden NJ, Bronx NY.   ...