In WKA, the Supreme Court advanced 2 reasons for concluding WKA was a citizen. The first was that he met the qualification for a natural born citizen, and thus must be a citizen. The second was the 14th Amendment.
See their decision at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
Also note the dissent in that case, protesting what the majority had done:
“Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that “natural-born citizen” applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not.”
I think the dissent was correct, but the fact remains it was the DISSENT, not the decision.
<>In WKA, the Supreme Court advanced 2 reasons for concluding WKA was a citizen. The first was that he met the qualification for a natural born citizen, and thus must be a citizen.<>
Baloney. Show me the words from the court. They are non-existent. Instead Justice Gray cites Justice Waite and his definition of “natural born citizen” by writing:
“In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in question, said: ‘The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.’ And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the construction of this provision.”
And this is what Justice Gray was referring to as to what Justice Waite proceeded to say:
“At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
There it is — right in front of you. Right out of Wong Kim Ark and Gray’s words themselves. Justice Gray acknowledges and recognizes the definition of “natural born citizen” passed down through the Court from natural law in these words:
“At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens...”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/
Get your lies straight —