April 1, 2026

March 31, 2026

OPEN THREAD: Excel.

Posted at 9:30 pm by Glenn Reynolds

RANDY BARNETT: Trump Is Right on Birthright Citizenship: The 14th Amendment’s authors would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from U.S. ‘jurisdiction.’

The clause grants citizenship to persons who meet two conditions: birth in the U.S. and being “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. The dispute is over the meaning of the latter term. Everyone agrees that it excludes at least three classes: children of diplomats, of soldiers from an invading army, and of American Indians maintaining tribal relations. In each of these categories, the status of the child depended on the status of the parent.

The constitutional debate is about the original concept embodied in the text that explains these exclusions and whether that concept embraces or excludes children born on U.S. soil to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily in the U.S. The court has never squarely addressed this question.

Before Mr. Trump’s executive order, what originalist scholarship existed on the original meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction” was sporadic and lightly tested if at all. The past year has produced an explosion of originalist scholarship on both sides. The justices are now in a good position to decide which side has presented the stronger originalist case. . . .

Sen. Lyman Trumbull (R., Ill.), who managed the Citizenship Clause in the upper chamber, explained that “subject to the jurisdiction” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else,” whether to a tribe or a foreign power. Rep. John Bingham (R., Ohio), the moving force behind the 14th Amendment, used the same framework, referring after ratification to persons born in the U.S. “and not owing allegiance to any foreign power.” These statements, and others Mr. Lash identified, demonstrate how leading Republicans explained the concept the text was meant to capture: birth plus full political membership.

Opponents of this interpretation rely heavily on a statement by Sen. Jacob Howard (R., Mich.) that the clause would “include every other class of persons” besides children of diplomats. In isolation, Howard’s statement does support the challengers’ understanding. But it can’t be taken literally; otherwise it would include tribal Indians. Howard later said that the relevant “jurisdiction” was the “full and complete jurisdiction” that tribal Indians lacked. Republicans didn’t maintain that tribes lay wholly beyond federal power, but that tribal members maintained an undissolved allegiance to a separate sovereign political community.

Read the whole thing.

Posted at 8:56 pm by Glenn Reynolds

IT’S COME TO THIS: Kristi Noem’s husband seen ‘pouting in photos with fake breasts.’

Bryon Noem, the husband of former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, was reported to have a secret double life as a model for adult entertainers.

Hundreds of online messages reviewed by The Daily Mail, involving three women in the “bimbofication” scene, in which performers dress as real-life Barbie dolls. The alleged messages indicate that Bryon praised the performers’ surgically-enhanced bodies and even, allegedly, confessed to how he lusted for “huge, huge ridiculous boobs.”

In one selfie shared by the insurance mogul, Bryon can be seen slipping into a flesh-colored crop top and skintight pink shorts. It also appeared that Bryon managed to stuff two balloons inside his shirt to resemble breasts and positioned the knots to resemble nipples.

• Trump grills aides on Kristi Noem’s alleged lover profiting off her $220M ad campaign

• Kristi Noem caught in awkward moment with husband as she’s questioned about alleged lover

Another photo obtained by The Daily Mail shows the father of three wearing a form-fitting pair of green leggings with a white top over two orbs. In a bizarre twist, Bryon’s face is fully visible in both photos.

Well, now we know why Noem was fired by Trump at the beginning of the month. But perhaps her husband is angling for a job in the next Democratic administration:

UPDATE:

Posted at 8:30 pm by Ed Driscoll

I SEE A HALLMARK MOVIE IN THE MAKING:

Posted at 6:28 pm by Glenn Reynolds

RILEY GAINES: Olympics finally picks biology over ideology to save women’s sports.

The International Olympic Committee finally did what so many of us have been demanding for years: it drew a clear, unambiguous line in the sand to protect women’s sports. Under its first-ever female president, Kirsty Coventry, the IOC announced a new eligibility policy that limits competition in the female category at the Olympics, Youth Olympics and all IOC-sanctioned events to females only. Novel concept, right? In today’s world, it is.

Starting with the 2028 Los Angeles Games, this will be verified through a simple, one-time SRY gene screening — a cheek swab, saliva sample, or blood draw — to confirm the absence of the male sex-determining gene. Chromosomes don’t lie. No more gray areas. No more pretending biology is optional.

This is a giant leap forward for women’s sports. They’ve done the right thing with a strong, clear policy. No equivocation, no tap-dancing, no pretense of “balancing priorities.” And they’ve backed it up with an objective, verifiable means of enforcement. Those responsible this time around deserve real congratulations.

We’re finally developing immunity to the social contagion.

Posted at 4:51 pm by Stephen Green