Comment by rayiner
6 days ago
No, the "and" functions the same way as in programming: "(born or naturalized in the U.S.) && (subject to the jurisdiction thereof)" requires both things to be true.
6 days ago
No, the "and" functions the same way as in programming: "(born or naturalized in the U.S.) && (subject to the jurisdiction thereof)" requires both things to be true.
Not according to the supreme court any time this has come up.
That’s how the Supreme Court always interprets “and” in a list of conditions.
No it's not. And, as a prime example, this case which the supreme court does not and did not take that view. It's not even something the dissent argued. This is your own personal interpretation.
1 reply →