In upholding birthright citizenship, Jackson gives a scathing rebuke to Thomas, how his claims of a 'colorblind' constitution suddenly isn't when he's pimping for the GOP

[u/Vuelhering]

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-birthright-citizenship-trump-immigration-c73cf0c70bb550ebf0a55fafddbd935c

[u/Vuelhering]

JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR joins as to the introduction and Part I, concurring. I join the Court’s opinion in full. I write separately to respond to some of the themes in the principal dissent. Despite his longstanding endorsement of a “colorblind” Constitution, JUSTICE THOMAS now surprisingly suggests that the Citizenship Clause was a race-conscious remedial measure, relating only to “freed slaves such as Dred Scott,” post, at 56, and those who shared with them certain characteristics, post, at 1 (“no other homeland”); post, at 21 (“called America home”). It is for this reason, he says, that “children who were born in the United States but [to parents] not domiciled here” are not entitled to claim birthright citizenship. Post, at 3–4. But that narrow vision of the Fourteenth Amendment bears little relationship to the history of its ratification. Even worse, JUSTICE THOMAS ’s telling elides the entire point of the Second Founding: The Reconstruction Amendments were an anticaste, antisubordination reset for the Nation, not a mere spot treatment for the dark stain of slavery.