The spectacle of the United States Supreme Court, that grand temple of jurisprudence, handing down a double defeat to President Trump on the matter of birthright citizenship has prompted an unexpected chorus of tut-tutting from across the Atlantic. British judges, those guardians of a more ancient legal tradition, have been heard to murmur disapprovingly. And who can blame them?
To watch the American judiciary flounder in the murky waters of constitutional interpretation is to witness the decline of a once-great legal civilisation. The Fourteenth Amendment is a marvel of post-Civil War reconstruction, yet it is now treated as a mere plaything for political expediency. My learned colleagues in London, with their stout adherence to precedent and parliamentary sovereignty, must surely feel a mix of pity and contempt.
The American experiment, which once stood as a beacon of liberty, now resembles the late Roman Empire: a tangled mess of contradictory edicts and power struggles. Birthright citizenship, that simple principle that any person born on American soil is a citizen, has become a battleground for ideological warfare. The Supreme Court, once a body of sober reflection, now acts as a political football.
Trump's defeat is not merely a setback for his own agenda; it is a symptom of a deeper rot. The United Kingdom, with its unwritten constitution and pragmatic legal system, should take note. This is what happens when you treat a sacred document as a menu of options rather than a binding contract.
The judges who criticise are not being snobbish. They are being realistic. The fall of Rome was not caused by barbarians at the gate but by internal decay.
America's judicial system is now in that dangerous phase of self-destruction.
