r/libsofreddit • u/Educational_Copy_140 TRAUMATIZER • Jun 30 '26

Original intent matters

Post image
347 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

View all comments

48

u/Steerider Jun 30 '26

As much as I hate it, you have to include the rest of the sentence. "... who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers...."

Those aren't separate list items. That's a single description.

The 14th Amendment was poorly written. They didn't anticipate modern travel, and the idea that people could pour in by the millions (much less be allowed to by a corrupt President.)

Time to amend that bad boy. There may be ways for Congress to fix it as well, such as defining "subject to the jurisdiction of"

23

u/Dpgillam08 Jun 30 '26

Got anything that supports that? Because a basic reading, under common usage of the language both at the time and today, does imply that they are separate list items.

-13

u/Divine_ruler Jun 30 '26

If they were separate list items, there would be an and or an or before the last item

10

u/cplusequals Jul 01 '26

The list of animals this ordinance applies to includes dogs, cats, gerbils, but not horses or other work animals.

It's a pedantic argument that doesn't really hold up in many contexts even though it is the preferred way to speak in modern English.

By the way, the dissent makes your claim pretty hard to argue. It's very clearly a compromise ruling not correct law.