Comment by samiwami
5 hours ago
it’s a cut and dry constitutional amendment, it doesn’t matter if Thomas thinks the people that were in mind when it was drafted are not the same people it applies to now. if they want to change it, go ahead and get the states to ratify a new amendment.
Supreme Court doesn’t get to throw out an amendment because it’s old.
It was one vote away from going Thomas's way, so I wouldn't say it doesn't matter what he thinks.
As a non-american, I would have enjoyed the precedent that the logical conclusion had to be that I would not be subject to the laws of the US, when visiting.
The Thomas interpretation must logically have given diplomatic immunity to anyone on an ESTA too.
It's also amusing that you won't ever hear conservatives like Thomas making the same argument when it comes to, say, the 2nd amendment.
I was just thinking the same thing lol. 2A is such a divisive topic.