Anthony Michael Kreis
@anthonymkreis.bsky.social
Constitutional law prof, historical political scientist, FRHistS studying:
The United States Supreme Court
American Political Development
Anglo-American Constitutionalism
📍ATL
Author, Rot and Revival:
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/rot-and-revival/paper
The United States Supreme Court
American Political Development
Anglo-American Constitutionalism
📍ATL
Author, Rot and Revival:
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/rot-and-revival/paper
Pinned
Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development: Kreis, Anthony Michael: 9780520394193: Amazon.com: Books
Rot and Revival: The History of Constitutional Law in American Political Development [Kreis, Anthony Michael] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Rot and Revival: The History of Const...
t.co
🥳🥂 PUBLICATION DAY! 🎉🍾
After many years of work, my University of California Press book, Rᴏᴛ ᴀɴᴅ Rᴇᴠɪᴠᴀʟ: Tʜᴇ Hɪsᴛᴏʀʏ ᴏғ Cᴏɴsᴛɪᴛᴜᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ Lᴀᴡ ɪɴ Aᴍᴇʀɪᴄᴀɴ Pᴏʟɪᴛɪᴄᴀʟ Dᴇᴠᴇʟᴏᴘᴍᴇɴᴛ, is out in the world! So grateful for all the support that made it possible! t.co/RQ6vd1qs4M
After many years of work, my University of California Press book, Rᴏᴛ ᴀɴᴅ Rᴇᴠɪᴠᴀʟ: Tʜᴇ Hɪsᴛᴏʀʏ ᴏғ Cᴏɴsᴛɪᴛᴜᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ Lᴀᴡ ɪɴ Aᴍᴇʀɪᴄᴀɴ Pᴏʟɪᴛɪᴄᴀʟ Dᴇᴠᴇʟᴏᴘᴍᴇɴᴛ, is out in the world! So grateful for all the support that made it possible! t.co/RQ6vd1qs4M
This isn’t a university.
From the Oklahoma U student paper: the school is now saying it will automatically suspend faculty (with pay) in response to student complaints
www.oudaily.com/news/ou-poli...
www.oudaily.com/news/ou-poli...
December 14, 2025 at 1:19 AM
This isn’t a university.
Okay. Now. This is too cute.
December 13, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Okay. Now. This is too cute.
In Trump’s Justice Dept., Failing in Court Might Be Better Than Bucking the Boss www.nytimes.com/2025/12/12/u...
In Trump’s Justice Dept., Failing in Court Might Be Better Than Bucking the Boss
www.nytimes.com
December 13, 2025 at 2:22 PM
In Trump’s Justice Dept., Failing in Court Might Be Better Than Bucking the Boss www.nytimes.com/2025/12/12/u...
Honestly, y’all, I really don’t want to come across as a nasty person, but I find it hard to advocate for good history in this moment when random historical narratives come up out of nowhere to (I suspect) influence litigation.
I promise, I’m not an asshole, but I am genuinely offended by it all.
I promise, I’m not an asshole, but I am genuinely offended by it all.
December 13, 2025 at 3:21 AM
Honestly, y’all, I really don’t want to come across as a nasty person, but I find it hard to advocate for good history in this moment when random historical narratives come up out of nowhere to (I suspect) influence litigation.
I promise, I’m not an asshole, but I am genuinely offended by it all.
I promise, I’m not an asshole, but I am genuinely offended by it all.
Sat down for drinks and my friend goes, “Here’s to the common law!”
elmo from sesame street is standing in front of a wall of fire .
ALT: elmo from sesame street is standing in front of a wall of fire .
media.tenor.com
December 13, 2025 at 1:01 AM
Sat down for drinks and my friend goes, “Here’s to the common law!”
me when my friends ask me if I want to go out for a cocktail despite saying I would stay in
December 12, 2025 at 11:57 PM
me when my friends ask me if I want to go out for a cocktail despite saying I would stay in
I hope they get to a hospital quick. That sounds painful.
December 12, 2025 at 11:19 PM
I hope they get to a hospital quick. That sounds painful.
It occurred to me from a thread @btkeener.bsky.social elsewhere that part of the reason so much of the alien enemy aspect of birthright subject status has less depth than it might?
England simply hadn’t been invaded unsuccessfully enough to raise some more complex questions.
England simply hadn’t been invaded unsuccessfully enough to raise some more complex questions.
December 12, 2025 at 10:57 PM
It occurred to me from a thread @btkeener.bsky.social elsewhere that part of the reason so much of the alien enemy aspect of birthright subject status has less depth than it might?
England simply hadn’t been invaded unsuccessfully enough to raise some more complex questions.
England simply hadn’t been invaded unsuccessfully enough to raise some more complex questions.
Reposted by Anthony Michael Kreis
WOW. @haleaziz.bsky.social with a new scoop: ICE now gets a running list of every person who is going to be taking a domestic flight inside the United States from the TSA and runs it through their database looking for targets. This explains the Babson College student's arrest.
Immigration Agents Are Using Air Passenger Data for Deportation Effort
www.nytimes.com
December 12, 2025 at 9:26 PM
WOW. @haleaziz.bsky.social with a new scoop: ICE now gets a running list of every person who is going to be taking a domestic flight inside the United States from the TSA and runs it through their database looking for targets. This explains the Babson College student's arrest.
I’m going to repeat this here because Harlan was no saint in Wong Kim Ark and we should be honest.
December 12, 2025 at 8:04 PM
I’m going to repeat this here because Harlan was no saint in Wong Kim Ark and we should be honest.
I hope y’all have a lovely common law free weekend.
December 12, 2025 at 7:45 PM
I hope y’all have a lovely common law free weekend.
A person doesn’t magically transform into a persona non grata in England because a state of war erupts between England and their home country while they’re living peacefully in the realm and under the crown’s protection.
What does this say in English
December 12, 2025 at 7:12 PM
A person doesn’t magically transform into a persona non grata in England because a state of war erupts between England and their home country while they’re living peacefully in the realm and under the crown’s protection.
Some asked if there was caselaw on this point. Tis!
December 12, 2025 at 7:01 PM
Some asked if there was caselaw on this point. Tis!
Good question.
Natural-born under the common law meant within the crown’s territory or as deemed by Parliament by law.
A child born abroad is a citizen by virtue of statute under Congress’s powers— though common law would cover foreign ambassadors— and they’re still natural-born citizens.
Natural-born under the common law meant within the crown’s territory or as deemed by Parliament by law.
A child born abroad is a citizen by virtue of statute under Congress’s powers— though common law would cover foreign ambassadors— and they’re still natural-born citizens.
So does this mean that a child born abroad to citizen parents becomes a citizen only because Congress (under its uniform naturalization authority) mandated it, as I had thought? Or does the inherited allegiance cover it?
December 12, 2025 at 5:45 PM
Good question.
Natural-born under the common law meant within the crown’s territory or as deemed by Parliament by law.
A child born abroad is a citizen by virtue of statute under Congress’s powers— though common law would cover foreign ambassadors— and they’re still natural-born citizens.
Natural-born under the common law meant within the crown’s territory or as deemed by Parliament by law.
A child born abroad is a citizen by virtue of statute under Congress’s powers— though common law would cover foreign ambassadors— and they’re still natural-born citizens.
Reposted by Anthony Michael Kreis
Birthright citizenship under the common law, a thread:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
December 12, 2025 at 2:28 PM
Birthright citizenship under the common law, a thread:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
Reposted by Anthony Michael Kreis
@anthonymkreis.bsky.social laying the common law tradition here; but what is crucial to me is this common law recognition was included in Justice Curtis’s dissent in Dred. His dissent was a foundational text for the Abolitionist, which absorbed previous abolitionist readings of the Constitution.
Justice Curtis, in dissent in Dred Scott (1857), found fault in the majority for failing to apply the common law locality rule: ”The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, 'a natural-born citizen." It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth."
December 12, 2025 at 5:00 PM
@anthonymkreis.bsky.social laying the common law tradition here; but what is crucial to me is this common law recognition was included in Justice Curtis’s dissent in Dred. His dissent was a foundational text for the Abolitionist, which absorbed previous abolitionist readings of the Constitution.
Anyone who uses the term “USAians,” I presume to be an alien enemy under the common law and shan’t entertain.
December 12, 2025 at 4:36 PM
Anyone who uses the term “USAians,” I presume to be an alien enemy under the common law and shan’t entertain.
Tired: Shadow Docket
Wired: Interim Docket
Bespoke: Initial Thoughts by Ye Olde Court of Starchamber on Dyvers Matters
Wired: Interim Docket
Bespoke: Initial Thoughts by Ye Olde Court of Starchamber on Dyvers Matters
December 12, 2025 at 4:09 PM
Tired: Shadow Docket
Wired: Interim Docket
Bespoke: Initial Thoughts by Ye Olde Court of Starchamber on Dyvers Matters
Wired: Interim Docket
Bespoke: Initial Thoughts by Ye Olde Court of Starchamber on Dyvers Matters
I want to highlight this part of the thread because I find it particularly fascinating.
Here is how A.V. Dicey described the rule in 1896, two years before Wong Kim Ark was decided. Notice, he says, even a French prisoner of war’s child *is* a natural born subject, but a hostile foreigner actor's child during a time of war and invasion is not:
December 12, 2025 at 3:31 PM
I want to highlight this part of the thread because I find it particularly fascinating.
My brothers and sisters in Christ, I am an academic because I believe in the pursuit of truth, not power.
If I’m explaining the historical origins of birthright citizenship in the common law, my intention is to educate and preserve history.
If I’m explaining the historical origins of birthright citizenship in the common law, my intention is to educate and preserve history.
Why state historical common law?
What purpose?
What do you intend to achieve?
Given the subject matter, we surmise, but could be incorrect, your purpose/intent is to affect the possible changes to 'birthright citizenship'.
Again, that history is largely a non-factor.
Nice analysis though.
What purpose?
What do you intend to achieve?
Given the subject matter, we surmise, but could be incorrect, your purpose/intent is to affect the possible changes to 'birthright citizenship'.
Again, that history is largely a non-factor.
Nice analysis though.
December 12, 2025 at 3:06 PM
My brothers and sisters in Christ, I am an academic because I believe in the pursuit of truth, not power.
If I’m explaining the historical origins of birthright citizenship in the common law, my intention is to educate and preserve history.
If I’m explaining the historical origins of birthright citizenship in the common law, my intention is to educate and preserve history.
Birthright citizenship under the common law, a thread:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
December 12, 2025 at 2:28 PM
Birthright citizenship under the common law, a thread:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
I have done this many times on social media, in print, and in media interviews, but not to be accused of taking others’ not seriously enough, by plainly stating the law and history of birthright citizenship, I’m taking the time here:
Getting ready. I got a common law thread coming this morning.
a cartoon of a man in a top hat drinking from a cup with the words " british moment " below him
ALT: a cartoon of a man in a top hat drinking from a cup with the words " british moment " below him
media.tenor.com
December 12, 2025 at 12:53 PM
Getting ready. I got a common law thread coming this morning.
Reposted by Anthony Michael Kreis
Happy Friday the joke below is essentially the legal argument of Tina Peters’s attorney in this…document sent to Trump
coloradonewsline.com/wp-content/u...
See pp. 7-8
@rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social @kovarsky.bsky.social @carlcecere.bsky.social @anthonymkreis.bsky.social@scottjshapiro.bsky.social
coloradonewsline.com/wp-content/u...
See pp. 7-8
@rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social @kovarsky.bsky.social @carlcecere.bsky.social @anthonymkreis.bsky.social@scottjshapiro.bsky.social
December 12, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Happy Friday the joke below is essentially the legal argument of Tina Peters’s attorney in this…document sent to Trump
coloradonewsline.com/wp-content/u...
See pp. 7-8
@rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social @kovarsky.bsky.social @carlcecere.bsky.social @anthonymkreis.bsky.social@scottjshapiro.bsky.social
coloradonewsline.com/wp-content/u...
See pp. 7-8
@rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social @kovarsky.bsky.social @carlcecere.bsky.social @anthonymkreis.bsky.social@scottjshapiro.bsky.social
All ideas are valid. 🙃
DO YOU WHAT THAT “CURRENT LAW” IS CALLED?
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
December 12, 2025 at 2:07 AM
All ideas are valid. 🙃