Kootenai County Spectator

  • Home
  • Kootenai County Spectator

Kootenai County Spectator Aggregator page of all the emails sent out by Erin B. about meetings/politics in Kootenai County. Telegram anyone? t.me/kcspectator

07/11/2025
07/11/2025

Dear Friends,

For over a century, America has operated under an interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause that many now believe is the only constitutionally permissible reading. Automatic citizenship for anyone born on American soil, regardless of their parents' legal status, has become so accepted that courts have treated it as settled law. Even I agreed with this interpretation for a while. But a closer examination of the text, history, and early precedent raises serious questions about whether this interpretation reflects what the framers intended.

Last week, Idaho joined 23 other state attorneys general in urging the United States Supreme Court to restore the original understanding of the Citizenship Clause. The issue is whether the Constitution actually mandates birthright citizenship in all cases, or whether the framers intended something more measured.

The text of the Amendment states that citizenship extends to those "born ... in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." That second phrase matters. It was added deliberately, and it means something. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, its primary purpose was clear: to constitutionally protect the citizenship rights of freed slaves after the Civil War. Senator Lyman Trumbull, who drafted the related Civil Rights Act of 1866, explicitly stated that the citizenship provision excluded "persons temporarily resident in [the United States] whom we would have no right to make citizens." Representative John Bingham, the principal architect of the Amendment, emphasized that citizenship required parents who were residents of the United States.

Even those who advocate for automatic birthright citizenship acknowledge that the Citizenship Clause doesn't apply in all cases. All parties agree it excludes children of foreign diplomats and certain others. The core dispute, therefore, is not whether location of birth alone determines citizenship—everyone agrees it doesn't—but rather how broadly or narrowly the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" should be read.

The historical record is extensive. In the 1880s, two different Secretaries of State denied citizenship to persons born in the United States whose parents remained domiciled overseas. Legal commentators of that era consistently distinguished between the American approach, which required parental domicile or lawful residence, and the British rule of pure birthplace citizenship. Justice Joseph Story wrote in 1834 that citizenship "should not apply to the children of parents ... who were abiding there for temporary purposes."

The stakes here are significant. Over 9 million illegal aliens have entered our nation in recent years, overwhelming our infrastructure and challenging our capacity to assimilate newcomers. Many proceed to interior states after crossing the border illegally. Idaho and other states face real economic, health, and public safety challenges from policies that go beyond what the Constitution requires.

Some critics claim this interpretation is beyond debate, but the historical and legal record is more complex than that narrative suggests. The Supreme Court's decision in Wong Kim Ark in 1898 involved a child whose parents were lawfully present and permanently domiciled in the United States. The Court repeatedly emphasized throughout that decision that the parents were "residents" and "domiciled within the United States." That case did not address children of parents present unlawfully or temporarily.
Our amicus brief argues that conferring United States citizenship requires a more meaningful connection than mere physical presence by happenstance or illegality. The original understanding repeatedly pointed to parental domicile or lawful permanent residence as the measuring stick for the requisite connection to United States jurisdiction.

This is about respecting what the Constitution actually says and what its framers intended. It's about protecting Idaho families from bearing the costs of a policy that encourages illegal immigration. And it's about ensuring that citizenship remains meaningful, rather than being reduced to an accident of geography.
The Trump Administration is asking the Supreme Court to adopt an interpretation that aligns with the original meaning of the Citizenship Clause. Idaho stands with that effort because we believe the Constitution should be interpreted according to its text and original public meaning, not according to what is politically convenient or what later administrations may have preferred.

The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to provide clarity on this fundamental issue. Whatever the Court ultimately decides, Idaho will continue defending the constitutional principles that protect state sovereignty and the rule of law.

Best regards,
Raúl

As we're all freaking out over the absolutely despicable CDA Library Board "finalists," this is a great time to remind p...
07/11/2025

As we're all freaking out over the absolutely despicable CDA Library Board "finalists," this is a great time to remind people that there are open advisory board positions for Kootenai County. They will not be making a decision until Tuesday so apply TODAY! https://www.kcgov.us/334/Advisory-Boards

07/11/2025

🍂🍁🍂

🚨There are two finalists for the CDA Library Board Trustee position, which were "reviewed by the CDA Library Board and r...
07/11/2025

🚨There are two finalists for the CDA Library Board Trustee position, which were "reviewed by the CDA Library Board and recommended to Mayor Woody who, in turn will make a recommendation to the city council, which will vote."🚨

🤬

👉👉This is a GREAT opportunity to email Mayor Woody and tell him your thoughts on his two "finalists."
[email protected]

As we already knew, Sherriff Bob Norris did "nothing malicious to warrant a criminal complaint" stemming from the Clipbo...
07/11/2025

As we already knew, Sherriff Bob Norris did "nothing malicious to warrant a criminal complaint" stemming from the Clipboard incident at the KCRCC Town Hall. 🙌

"We reviewed the investigation to determine only whether Sheriff Norris should be charged with the crime of battery. Under Idaho law, a peace officer cannot be charged with battery so long as he is acting within the scope of his duties and in good faith and without malice. Our investigator found two instances where the sheriff made physical contact with attendees: when the sheriff attempted to arrest or remove Teresa Borrenpohl from the event and when he detained the man sitting between Borrenpohl and the aisle. As explained below, the investigation did not uncover any evidence to suggest the sheriff acted in bad faith or with malice, and criminal charges would not be appropriate."

📰 Idaho Attorney General Says No Charges Will Be Filed Against Kootenai County Sheriff for Physical Removal of Disrupter Teresa Borrenpohl at Town Hall Event

COEUR d’ALENE, Idaho — The Idaho Attorney General’s Office has concluded its review of public corruption complaints related to a February 22, 2025, town hall event hosted by the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee (KCRCC) and determined that no criminal charges will be filed against Sheriff Robert Norris.

In a letter dated November 3, 2025, Deputy Attorney General Jeff Nye, Chief of the Criminal Law Division, stated that the investigation “did not uncover any evidence to suggest the sheriff acted in bad faith or with malice, and criminal charges would not be appropriate.”

The investigation reviewed whether Sheriff Norris committed battery when he made physical contact with attendees during the KCRCC event at Coeur d’Alene High School. The Attorney General’s Office found that Norris acted within his lawful duties and that Idaho law protects peace officers from battery charges when acting in good faith and without malice.

📄 Details from the Attorney General’s Letter:

The KCRCC reserved and paid for use of the high school auditorium and set rules of decorum for attendees.

Teresa Borrenpohl, identified as the attendee who disrupted the meeting, repeatedly interrupted legislators after warnings and refused to leave when asked by Sheriff Norris.

The sheriff identified himself and warned that she would be es**rted out if she did not comply. After she refused, he briefly took hold of her arm before stepping back and directing two individuals to es**rt her out.

A man seated nearby was briefly detained after resisting the sheriff’s efforts to observe the removal but was released without arrest when the sheriff determined the contact was likely unintentional.

The Attorney General’s Office found no evidence of bad faith or malice in either interaction.

The letter notes that the office’s jurisdiction applied only to Sheriff Norris and did not include the private security personnel or other individuals involved.




📰📺Where the News gets their news for North Idaho! Send us what you see happening in your area! ⤵️❣️
facebook.com/becomesupporter/NorthIdahoNews/

07/11/2025

Now that Dan Gookin will be sworn in as Coeur d'Alene Mayor in January, who do you think should take his open city council position?
Also, should we take bets as to who gets voted into that spot by our liberal city council?

The elections are always a wild ride and last night's results are more of the same! Congratulations to all the winners a...
05/11/2025

The elections are always a wild ride and last night's results are more of the same! Congratulations to all the winners and thank you to everyone else who put up a good fight! Onto the next one!

Clay Larkin's daughter, Alison Larkin McArthur, reached out to me the other day, wanting to set the record straight abou...
03/11/2025

Clay Larkin's daughter, Alison Larkin McArthur, reached out to me the other day, wanting to set the record straight about her late father's endorsement. Below are Alison's words in their entirety to do with as you will.

Hello Erin,

My father and I had many discussions about the city he loved and served before he passed. He was sad to see that the close-knit community he had helped create was falling by the wayside. During his illness, Ron never once called or stopped in. Today, Ron is touting my father's endorsement for mayor, but the reality is that endorsement was one of my father, Clay Larkin's, greatest regrets. Scot Haug, on the other hand, was like a son to my father. Scot was checking in and visiting with my father during his illness and his last days. Scot had no intention of running for office when my father was alive, but if my father were alive today, he would wholeheartedly endorse Scot. My mother recently passed, but not before Scot announced his run for Mayor. My mom and I often talked about her support for Scot. One of her last decisions with her was to give Scot a donation and to make sure his election signs were in her yard.

1. Ron was not present or available to the citizens of Post Falls. He's not a people person to the typical resident.
2. Ron dissolved community programs that united this community for many years
3. Ron discontinued the Mayor's Youth Awards. Created by my father to highlight the outstanding service from our community teens.
4. Ron discontinued the practice meeting with our local schools/students to learn about local government. It had been a great collaboration with our schools. No more.
5. As Mayor, Ron stopped the tradition of Mayors who were present at Veterans' / Memorial Day events, honoring our local heroes.
6. My father was disappointed that Ron stopped the tradition of the Mayor reading to children at Winter Fest.
7. New and expanding businesses would reach out to my father because Ron would not be available to listen to their hopes and concerns.
8. Until recently, Ron sent staff or another council member to sit on the CDA Economic Development for our region. Under my father's leadership, serving on this board, companies such as Buck Knives and Cabela's, ALK, and many others chose Post Falls as their home, building a strong economic base. Ron has built apartments.
9. My father was disappointed that other city mayors expressed to him that Ron wasn't a collaborator and didn't work with neighboring cities.
10. City staff and former employees would reach out to my father to say that Ron was absent with city employees and never took the time to get to know them. They were numbers, not people.
11. My father was disappointed in Ron's lack of attendance at the Association of Idaho Cities. An association that Post Falls use to have leadership roles and formerly won several awards under my father's tenure.
12. People would stop my father in the grocery stores and express how disappointed they were in Ron as mayor. My father echoed those comments in his disappointment with Ron's leadership.

Scot Haug was like a son to my father because of Scot's heart for our community and his experience in leading with excellence, kindness, and intelligence.
1. Scot grew the Color Guard program for the city, recognizing veterans, fallen first responders, and law enforcement, attending Veteran's Day events, and more.
2. Scot will bring back the collaboration with our students/schools, including Mayor Larkin's Youth Award program.
3. Scot will be present and speak at community events like Post Falls Days, Winterfest, and other city gatherings.
4. Scot will represent the City of Post Falls on all commissions and boards, without a self-serving agenda or appointing someone else to represent the mayor.
5. Scot will empower employees to innovate and collaborate, and he will know them by name. He is a community uniter, not a dismisser.
6. Scot will be a mayor of the people - he will meet people where they are at, open public access for community input, and most of all, he will continue to provide his greatest asset to the job of Mayor - listening. He will always do what is best for Post Falls.

CDA City Council meeting on Monday: the people highlighted are the ones that are being REappointed. ..The same people be...
01/11/2025

CDA City Council meeting on Monday: the people highlighted are the ones that are being REappointed. ..
The same people being reappointed over and over again is a major issue and this is something that needs to be changed.

Full meeting packet here:https://www.cdaid.org/files/Council/Packet110425WEB.pdf

24/10/2025

Kootenai County November Election Picks Ep. 3: Post Falls.....and you're not going to like them.
Why? Because they don't fit in a perfect box that we're made to believe is there.
Post Falls is all about the $$$$.

Address


Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Kootenai County Spectator posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Kootenai County Spectator:

  • Want your business to be the top-listed Media Company?

Share