2nd bite at the apple? Congressman’s plan would push Supremes to reconsider birthright citizenship ruling * WorldNetDaily * by Bob Unruh 60%

By https:49% www.wnd.com84% author39% runruh84% #46% person46% b6338fb2e347d34a6b69a6be523aca3b84%

7/10/2026, 5:38:17 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Overconfidence Bias, and Framing Effect, with Politically Right Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 16.3% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 468 faulty-reasoning hits from 798 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.2% and a BS Rank of 60% (5,685 of 13,954 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.30% of the article peer group.

2nd bite at the apple? 
Congressman’s plan would push Supremes to reconsider birthright citizenship ruling 
President Donald Trump already has called on the Supreme Court to correct its “miscarriage of justice” that it delivered to the American people with its recent birthright citizenship ruling. 
That decision said, in layman’s terms, that anyone in the world has a right to claim U.S. citizenship for their newborns if those infants are born in the United States, even if the parents are illegal aliens, fleeing criminals, birth tourists, or something else. 
Now a report at Just the News confirms that a member of Congress is working to push the court in Trump’s direction. 
Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet  delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! 
Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND's Email News Alerts! 
It is legislation that would restrict birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. 
Rep. 
Glenn Grothman says justices’ recent birthright citizenship ruling “the worst Supreme Court decision as far as impact on our country in my lifetime.” https://t.co/ZVQs9b4jTK 
 John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) July 10, 2026 
Rep. 
Glenn Grothman, R-Wis., a House subcommittee chairman long influential on immigration issues, told the Just the News’ “No Noise” TV show Thursday that he was co-sponsoring congressional bills aimed at clarifying the scope of birthright citizenship, ensuring that it only applied to children of citizens, permanent residents, or military members, the publication reported. 
“Hopefully, by limiting that, we’ll give it another shot at the Supreme Court,” he confirmed. 
The Birthright Citizenship Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit birthright citizenship to children born to parents who are “(1) a U.S. citizen or national, (2) a lawful permanent resident residing in the United States, or (3) a non-U.S. national (alien under federal law) with a lawful immigration status who is performing active service in the Armed Forces.” 
The law, which was based on the 14th Amendment, could be perceived as being in conflict with the 14th Amendment, and those are the types of situations that are likely to trigger a high court review. 
The court’s ruling in Trump v. 
Barbara struck down the president’s executive order terminating 
birthright citizenship for children of temporary visa holders or illegal immigrants. 
Grothman said, “I should say this is the worst Supreme Court decision as far as impact on our country in my lifetime.” 
The Pew Research Center estimates that 320,000 babies were born to mothers in 2023 who were unauthorized immigrants or held temporary legal status in the U.S., representing about 9% of total U.S. births. 
WorldNetDaily reported on Trump’s comments: 
Trump said, “Signs and Billboards are being put up all over our Southern Border, and Mexico, advertising BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP, with ‘Deliveries starting at $4000.’ 
Likewise, similar signs going up all over our Country. 
Billions of Dollars will be illegally made by this SCAM, with Citizenship going to anyone willing to pay. 
It will be, by far, the number one way of becoming a citizen, and then the entire family will be allowed to follow. 
Not sustainable. 
NOBODY SAW THIS COMING!!! 
AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP IS NOT FOR SALE! 
In fact, that is a crime, and therefore, the Supreme Court’s ruling is wrong. 
I will be asking for a Rehearing by the United States Supreme Court, IMMEDIATELY. 
This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don’t change their absolutely insane decision.” 
The Supreme Court rarely rehears cases, although it has happened on occasion in the past. 
In the current court catastrophe, the justices ruled 5-4 that “children of ‘parents unlawfully or temporarily present’ in the U.S. automatically become citizens in keeping with the 14th Amendment.” 
🚨 BREAKING: President Trump announces he is filing for a RE-HEARING with the US Supreme Court on birthright citizenship after an ANCHOR BABY HOSPITAL was discovered in Texas 
“Signs and Billboards are being put up all over our Southern Border, and Mexico, advertising BIRTHRIGHT… pic.twitter.com/LM0zAnnAc8 
 Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) July 8, 2026 
Trump is demanding the Supreme Court rehear the birthright citizenship case after billboards advertising birthing centers in the USA were spotted in Mexico 
END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP 
These people are laughing in our faces pic.twitter.com/wWe0HM613G 
 Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 8, 2026 
Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. 
He is currently a news editor for the WND News Center, and also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially. 
Read more of Bob Unruh's articles here. 
Birthright citizenship , Congress , Supreme Court 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
5.8%
Framing Effect
5.5%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
1.9%
Negativity Bias
7.3%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
5.5%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
2.9%
Circular Reasoning
1.8%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
4.1%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
3.5%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
16.3%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
4.1%

798 words analyzed.

Voice attribution · Experimental

Who is speaking?

See where attributed voices appear and how each speaker's manipulation signature differs from the writer's voice.

6speakers40%attributed speech475writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Selected voice

Donald Trump

54%flagged-word coverage
129 attributed words40% of attributed speech34% writer coverage
Politically Right Leaning Bias-27.4 pts
Writer 27%Donald Trump 0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service-6.9 pts
Writer 6.9%Donald Trump 0%
Quote-first Misdirection-5.9 pts
Writer 5.9%Donald Trump 0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.