June 30, 2026 – Supreme Court decisions on: Birthright Citizenship; Trump vs Slaughter; Boys in Girls Sports; Mail-in Ballots

In Email/Dossier/Govt Corruption Investigations, Featured Timeline Entries by Katie Weddington

Birthright Citizenship

WOW! Justice Alito is absolutely FUMING over SCOTUS giving the green light to birthright citizenship

“In my judgment, the court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country’s future.”

“Suppose that a person’s only connection to this country is that he was born here to a mother who was present just long enough to give birth and then quickly return to her native country.

Suppose that country is a strategic adversary or enemy of the United States. Suppose the child NEVER visited the United States while grow and was inculcated with hatred of this country.

According to this court, now, that person is a citizen of the United States. He can enter and leave the country as he pleases. He can travel the world on a United States passport.

Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent.” — Justice Samuel Alito in his dissent

BREAKING NEWS: The Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship, and Justice Thomas pens a POWERFUL dissent.

Thomas accuses the majority of “repurposing” the 14th Amendment “to protect its own set of preferred rights that the Reconstruction Congress never contemplated and that cannot find support in its text.”

“Today, the Court does so again by recognizing a constitutional right to citizenship for the children of all foreign birth tourists and illegal aliens.”

“I am not sure that today’s opinion will stand the test of time. The Citizenship Clause ‘added greatly to the dignity and glory of American citizenship.’ Today’s opinion devalues that citizenship.”

“I respectfully dissent.” ⬇️

Aside from legislation to end birthright citizenship, there are other bills proposed to end the birth tourism industry. These bills would disrupt profit-driven networks arranging travel, housing, medical care and visas for pregnant foreigners seeking U.S. citizenship for their children.

Key bills include Sen. Marsha Blackburn’s Ban Birth Tourism Act (S. 1812, 2025), which amends the INA to deem such visitors inadmissible on B visas, and Sen. John Cornyn’s BACK OFF Act (2026), which imposes criminal penalties on facilitators for fraud and organized schemes while creating a dedicated enforcement task force. (Just the News)

Congressman Chip Roy (TX-21) issued the following statement after the Supreme Court’s ruling on birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara.

“The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roberts, failed the American people, the Constitution, and the rule of law today—not to mention the national security of the United States.

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in no way stands for the proposition of creating a dangerous cottage industry of traveling to our soil to manufacture United States citizenship. That’s insane. The Supreme Court today should have said so explicitly and ended this damaging exploitation of our laws.

Congress must now immediately do at least two things it should have done long ago. First, define the phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ very specifically to make clear that citizenship is tied to the citizenship of the parent, not the soil. Second, completely restrict funding from DHS or any other agency or state that provides documentation and status to anyone not subject to the ‘jurisdiction thereof.’ In other words, Congress must act immediately and must not hide behind the fiction that it must amend the Constitution to fix this abuse of our laws. To do otherwise would be an abject failure of the United States Congress,” said Rep. Roy.

QUADRUPLE BQQM… this is absolutely YUGE… follow me in this… it’s worth it…

This is a Supreme Court exposure operation as much as it is a senatorial pressure campaign…

The official ruling was 6–3 against Trump’s executive order, yet the constitutional wall beneath it stands only 5–4… that distinction is the decode…

Roberts, Barrett and the three liberal justices ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to children born here even when their parents are unlawfully or temporarily present…

Kavanaugh supplied the sixth vote to stop the order while rejecting the majority’s constitutional reasoning. In his view, the order does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment… it fails because it conflicts with the federal citizenship statute enacted by Congress…

Four justices are now publicly on record that the Constitution leaves Congress room to restrict birthright citizenship… Kavanaugh then moved the pressure upstream by making clear Congress can amend 8 USC §1401(a), create exceptions for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily inside the country and force the question back before the Court…

Trump forced the issue through the executive branch, the Court exposed its internal fault line, Kavanaugh identified the statutory barrier and placed the legislative key in the hands of the Senate…

The order was blocked because Congress left the law untouched… now every senator owns that decision…

Thomas followed with a 91-page constitutional foundation tracing citizenship through allegiance, jurisdiction, domicile, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Fourteenth Amendment debates and the limits of Wong Kim Ark…

He was building the record for the next case while warning that this ruling may not stand the test of time because it devalues American citizenship…

Alito translated the doctrine into national security reality… a mother enters long enough to give birth, returns to a strategic adversary, raises the child outside America and teaches that child to hate the United States… yet under the majority’s ruling, that person remains an American citizen with the passport, entry rights and political privileges attached to that status…

Thomas built the record, Alito exposed the consequence and Kavanaugh revealed the congressional mechanism… Roberts and Barrett supplied the decisive votes preserving the barrier…

Now follow the ladder…

Citizenship establishes membership, membership opens voter registration, registration creates ballot access, ballots determine representation, representation controls Congress and Congress writes the laws governing citizenship and elections…

That is why birthright citizenship legislation and the SAVE America Act are separate rails inside the same sovereignty system…

One determines who enters the political body… the other verifies citizenship before political power is exercised…

Birthright legislation defines membership, while the SAVE America Act protects the franchise through documentary proof of citizenship, voter identification, voter roll controls and election safeguards…

SCOTUS has exposed both ends of the political power chain… who becomes a citizen and how ballots are accepted and counted…

Senators can no longer hide behind the Court, presidential authority or claims that Congress lacks power… the ruling exposed the fracture, Kavanaugh explained why executive action was insufficient and the sixth vote identified Congress as the institution capable of changing the law…

The ruling did not close the issue… it exposed the entire ladder…

A 6–3 loss became a 5–4 constitutional fracture, a four-justice roadmap, a 91-page foundation, a national security warning and a direct legislative handoff to senators who must now place their names beside action or surrender…

The order was blocked… the architecture was revealed… the pressure moved upstream…

The Senate owns the outcome, watch video and read below…

Trump vs Slaughter

Democrats everywhere:

“You MAGAs are really going to regret Trump v. Slaughter when a Democrat gets elected President and he/she fires all the Republicans😡😡😡😡!!!!!”

NOPE.

They just do not get it. We already have a federal administrative bureaucracy already completely and totally controlled by Democrats in every imaginable way.

At least now when a Republican is President we’ll have some modicum of control, and when a Democrat is President it will be the current status quo.

Big improvement.

The biggest and most consequential Decision issued by the Court, by far, is the Slaughter Case, which overturned the very famous Humphrey’s Executor Rule. This whole concept of “Power” has been fought over for nearly 100 years, going all the way back to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, where a large slice of his Power was taken away. He fought to regain it, even wanting to “pack the Court,” but was unsuccessful in doing so. This Decision gives tremendous additional Power back to the Presidency, where it belongs. It is an Honor to be the sitting President who, after all these years, WON this very important, and hard fought, Case. We had other good Victories, too, and we also had the Birthright Citizenship loss, which we will work to correct in Congress, but the big SLAUGHTER, was SLAUGHTER. The Republican Party was treated very fairly by the United States Supreme Court. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

Boys in Girls School Sports

Mail-in Ballots and Election Day 

Election Integrity: Does Election Day Mean Election DAY?

SCOTUS: Nope https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1260_g3cn.pdf

WATSON, MISSISSIPPI SECRETARY OF STATE v.
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ET AL.

Held: The federal election-day statutes do not prevent Mississippi from counting absentee ballots postmarked by election day but received up to five days thereafter; nothing in the federal election-day statutes requires ballots to be received by election day. The question before the Court is narrow: whether counting ballots postmarked by election day, but received up to five days later, violates the federal election-day statutes.

The electorate’s choice is made when voting is complete, not when ballots are received. The most recent amendment to the Presidential election-day statute bears this out. While inserting the phrase “election day” into the statute and marking that date as a specific Tuesday, Congress also provided that when States “modif[y] the period of voting” in response to certain force majeure events, the term “election day” shall “include the modified period of voting.”

The federal election-day statutes do not preempt Mississippi’s law because the defining element of an “election” has always been the electorate’s choice of candidate. And a related federal statute—the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA)— confirms that while federal law dictates when ballots must be cast, state law governs when they must be received.