Who knew? Illegal aliens aren't lawbreakers: they're a "community!"

Just ask Maria Teresa Kumar, the MSNBC contributor and head of Voto Latino. On Monday's Morning Joe, discussing the impact of the Supreme Court ruling limiting the right of federal district court judges to issue rulings purporting to apply to the entire country, Kumar said:

"What Trump does is that he uses the undocumented community as a canary in the coal mine to test our institutions and to see how far we're willing to go to start eroding their rights."

What other "communities" might Trump threaten? The tax-evader community? The burglar community? Frightening!

Plus, miners took canaries with them to signal if a mine had carbon monoxide in the air. If the canaries died, they knew it was perilous. 

Kumar also dropped a statistic unintentionally revealing just what a problem birthright citizenship for children born to illegals represents:

"We're talking about almost a quarter million U.S.-born children every single year to undocumented folks."

250,000 a year! Over two decades, that's five million -- enough to noticeably alter our demographics — and elections. Miss "Voto Latino" is all about that mobilization. Also note another Kumar euphemism. They're not illegal aliens, they're undocumented "folks."

Interestingly, substitute host Katty Kay and New York Times Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak agreed that it is problematic for federal judges purporting to make their decisions apply nationally. Kay pointed out:

"When Barack Obama tried to give citizenship to the parents of children who were born in the United States, and a judge in Texas blocked it, and Democrats were very unhappy about that."

Liptak concurred:

"Quite right. Lots of people from both parties have hesitations about the idea that an individual judge can do more than decide the dispute before him or her."

However, Liptak suggested that there could be an exception for birthright citizenship cases, permitting the ruling of a single federal district court judge to apply nationally. Isn't that convenient!

Kay ended the segment with an interesting observation, suggesting that the Supreme Court ruling could create: 

"A situation where you have a lot of undocumented workers for various reasons, not just birthright citizenship, moving to blue states or to states with sanctuary cities. Those states then getting their services overwhelmed or getting targeted by the president. I mean, you can see where this unravels politically very quickly and potentially provides a problem for Democrats."

Ain't that a pity!

Message to blue state politicians: if you make your states or cities havens for illegal aliens, it can't just be for virtue-signaling or electoral purposes--it comes with consequences.

Here's the transcript.

MSNBC
Morning Joe
6/30/25
6:28 am EDT

KATTY KAY: Adam, this is something that, the injunctions is something that Democratic presidents have disliked in the past as much as Republicans have done. 

I remember when Barack Obama tried to give citizenship to the parents of children who were born in the United States, and a judge in Texas blocked it, and Democrats were very unhappy about that. 

So actually, is this something that in kind of less ferociously partisan times might meet with approval as a way of blocking the power of individual judges around the country?

ADAM LIPTAK: Quite right. Lots of people from both parties have hesitations about the idea that an individual judge can do more than decide the dispute before him or her, and bind the parties before him or her, and also say this applies to everybody. That's a problematic notion in general terms. 

It might well, though, be appropriate in the birthright citizenship case and in some other cases, because it's just hard to imagine, as, as Lisa was saying, a patchwork of laws around the country where if you're born on one side of a state line, you're a citizen, and on the other, not.

. . . 

MARIA TERESA KUMAR: And so when we're talking about almost a quarter-million U.S.-born children every single year of undocumented folks, you're talking not about a small population that all of a sudden can become stateless. So I do think that one of the things that we need to be looking at very precisely is, that what happens next? 

Because what we have seen is that often what Trump does is that he uses the undocumented community as a canary in the coal mine to test our institutions, and to see how far we're willing to go to start eroding their rights. But their rights are only the beginning. 

I think that in Sotomayor's dissent, she was very clear. God forbid you end, and I'm paraphrasing, but basically, God forbid you end up in the wrong state where your basic rights as a U.S. citizen could be abdicated because all of a sudden the laws in that state are quite different from the rest of the country. 

KAY: Yeah, I mean, you can see a situation where you have a lot of undocumented workers for various reasons, not just birthright citizenship, moving to blue states or to states with sanctuary cities. Those states then getting their services overwhelmed or getting targeted by the president. 

I mean, you can see where this unravels politically very quickly and potentially provides a problem for Democrats.