Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LucyT

The WKA decision is now brought up out of context to the current issue, as WKA’s parents were legal immigrants.

The issue for WKA is he went out of the country on business and stayed away for many years and came back. His citizenship was questioned when he returned.


407 posted on 11/01/2018 6:57:36 PM PDT by Hostage (Article V (Proud Member of the Deranged Q Fringe))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies ]


To: Hostage; rxsid; null and void; aragorn; azishot; AZ .44 MAG; Baynative; Beautiful_Gracious_Skies; ..

***

Back to the thread.

Check out Hostage’s reply to rxsid at # 407.

Thanks. Hostage.


408 posted on 11/01/2018 7:22:17 PM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies ]

To: Hostage; LucyT; rxsid; Electric Graffiti
The WKA decision is now brought up out of context to the current issue, as WKA’s parents were legal immigrants.

It is not out of context, it is clearly relevant to the question of Citizenship of a person born jus soli related to the parents legal status. The title of this thread is Birthright Citizenship

The issue for WKA is he went out of the country on business and stayed away for many years and came back. His citizenship was questioned when he returned.

He was profiled when he returned and the collector of customs impression of his Citizenship was questioned.

And Rxsid is correct when he states the decision is far reaching. There is virtually no reference to the debate of the 14th wereas in opinion Justice Gray writes:

all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
And then goes on to write:
The Constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words, either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except insofar as this is done by the affirmative declaration that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." In this as in other respects, it must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution
He used that as an excuse to quote about 100 English case law.. which Chief Justice Fuller and Justice Harlan wrote:
Nevertheless, Congress has persisted from 1795 in rejecting the English rule and in requiring the alien who would become a citizen of the United States, in taking on himself the ties binding him to our Government, to affirmatively sever the ties that bound him to any other.

Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:

Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.
And not only was it not intended to include persons born of aliens it did not include native Indians who were born here. Indians didn't gain Citizenship until 1924!

411 posted on 11/02/2018 7:18:45 AM PDT by GregNH (If you can't fight, please find a good place to hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson