ICYMI: Here is the DOJ brief in one of the state cases challenging President Trump's EO stating that citizenship is not conferred simply by virtue of the happenstance of birth within U.S.boundaries. (Didn't win, but most honest legal scholars believe, Trump / DOJ will eventually prevail on appeal.)

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25502871-trump-response-to-birthright-citizenship-motion/

PDF here:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.343943/gov.uscourts.wawd.343943.84.0.pdf (selected pages attached)

Dr. Eastman (who was wrongfully disbarred by California - which is, Anon believes, on appeal) for writing an argument (i.e., doing his job as a lawyer) that could be made re electors in 2020), said the US DOJ got it right here:

@DrJohnEastman

Boom. DOJ's Brief opposing the motion for preliminary injunction in the birthright citizenship case is powerful, and a very accurate assessment of the original public meaning of the Citizenship Clause. https:// tinyurl. com/ m3t4vd8a. Let's hope the judge in the case gives it the serious consideration it is due.

https://x.com/DrJohnEastman/status/1885882347087884680 (Dr. Eastman wrote an article many years ago that lays most of this out, too.)

The Washington state court ruled against Trump's DOJ's position* here a few days ago and it is (no doubt) going to be appealed. The sooner it gets to the US Supreme Court, the better!

* "After holding a hearing on February 6, Judge Coughenour granted the plaintiffs' motion for a nationwide preliminary injunction and enjoined the defendants from enforcing or implementing the Executive Order nationwide."

https://clearinghouse.net/case/45964/