A person who becomes a citizen, based on the laws of this country,in force at the moment of birth, is a Natural Born Citizen.
Which laws? Are positive laws what make them so?
However, YOUR small group of Birthers wants to redefine the term “Natural Born Citizen”.
A most interesting choice of words. What do they want to redefine it from?
Nobody with any authority agrees with you.
You must be parched from trying to draw water from that dry well.
YES, “positive law” trumps anything you have tried to come up with.
Madison trumps Vattel.
Congressional legislation trumps Vattel.
Even IF a Court, EVER, agreed with you, if legislation has been enacted, since that Court case, that legislation would trump any such Court ruling.
This is how the system works.
What is to keep you from claiming that “Natural Law” should dictate inheritance or divorce or child custody?
Natural Law and Common Law are seen as archaic, harsh, and very out dated in these areas.
It is absurd to think that Vattel can write a book, which some Founders read, and that, therefore, we should use Vattel’s definitions for every legal term in the Constitution.
The Founders also read, and for the most part FOLLOWED, English Common Law, which supports my view, not yours.
YES, “positive law” trumps anything you have tried to come up with.
Madison trumps Vattel.
Congressional legislation trumps Vattel.
Even IF a Court, EVER, agreed with you, if legislation has been enacted, since that Court case, that legislation would trump any such Court ruling.
This is how the system works.
What is to keep you from claiming that “Natural Law” should dictate inheritance or divorce or child custody?
Natural Law and Common Law are seen as archaic, harsh, and very out dated in these areas.
It is absurd to think that Vattel can write a book, which some Founders read, and that, therefore, we should use Vattel’s definitions for every legal term in the Constitution.
The Founders also read, and for the most part FOLLOWED, English Common Law, which supports my view, not yours.
YES, “positive law” trumps anything you have tried to come up with.
Madison trumps Vattel.
Congressional legislation trumps Vattel.
Even IF a Court, EVER, agreed with you, if legislation has been enacted, since that Court case, that legislation would trump any such Court ruling.
This is how the system works.
What is to keep you from claiming that “Natural Law” should dictate inheritance or divorce or child custody?
Natural Law and Common Law are seen as archaic, harsh, and very out dated in these areas.
It is absurd to think that Vattel can write a book, which some Founders read, and that, therefore, we should use Vattel’s definitions for every legal term in the Constitution.
The Founders also read, and for the most part FOLLOWED, English Common Law, which supports my view, not yours.
YES, “positive law” trumps anything you have tried to come up with.
Madison trumps Vattel.
Congressional legislation trumps Vattel.
Even IF a Court, EVER, agreed with you, if legislation has been enacted, since that Court case, that legislation would trump any such Court ruling.
This is how the system works.
What is to keep you from claiming that “Natural Law” should dictate inheritance or divorce or child custody?
Natural Law and Common Law are seen as archaic, harsh, and very out dated in these areas.
It is absurd to think that Vattel can write a book, which some Founders read, and that, therefore, we should use Vattel’s definitions for every legal term in the Constitution.
The Founders also read, and for the most part FOLLOWED, English Common Law, which supports my view, not yours.