fourteenth amendment

If America does have a consensus that we're all basically OK with the concept of governmental blacklists, and that we further approve of curtailing constitutional rights for people on such lists, then it should be relatively easy to get the necessary votes in Congress and the statehouses.
Scalia promoted anything but justice in his opposition to the Voting Rights Act and affirmative action, women's reproductive freedoms, and in particular, the rights and freedoms of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans* people.
For Donald Trump or anyone else to single out the negative, destructive, and, yes, evil passages of the Quran (or how some sects or cults within Islam co-opt, distort, and attempt to hijack the overall messages) without doing so as well with the holy books of Judaism and Christianity demonstrates a hierarchical double standard.
In a contentious hearing, the Supreme Court shows deep divisions on whether race can remain a factor in college admissions.
Whatever the nation decides to do about immigration, it cannot take away American citizenship from those people who were born here, even if their parents are undocumented. Such children are natural born citizens, or birthright citizens.
Mr. Trump's suggestion about repealing the Fourteenth Amendment gives us the opportunity to not only examine the case that gave rise to the Fourteenth Amendment but to compare that case with a more recent U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Whether we are descended from majority who came here willfully and found a better life, or from the many who came here unwillingly and lived lives of destitution and terror, the fact remains: We are all transplants, all the descendants of immigrants who desired to have a flourishing life.
Refuse to speak the words gun violence. Call it domestic terrorism. That's what it really is. Like my father, we must have the courage to take a stand. Let's refuse to be bullied by the NRA and the gun industry and their wealthy donors and highly-paid lobbyists.
While "liberty" is indeed an abstract concept, the Constitution is full of such concepts, and concerns about abuse do not excuse judges from conscientiously interpreting and applying those concepts.
Lash's Constitution is amoral -- it would allow myriad individual rights that are central to human flourishing to be voted up or down. He is free, of course, to argue for that view -- but it is one that the Founders rejected, the Framers of the Reconstruction Amendments rejected.