[Beckwith]

You might want to read the pinged post, it addresses your repeated mistaken impression of Elg and Ark.

I don't understand -- what "pinged post."

Do me the favor and describe the "mistaken impression."

Additionally, I have repeatedly said that I post the legal opinion of attorneys practicing in the federal courts system. So I would appreciate it if you would not attribute what you believe to be a "mistaken imprerssion" to me.

If you point out what you belive to be a "mistaken impression," I will have my consulting attorney reply. (that is unless I'm absolutely convinced that it is you who have the mistaken impression, and I can demonstrate that).

Thanks . . .

[MHGinTN]

Non-Sequitur purposely conflates native born and natural born, to twist the ruyling in the court ruling to fit the non-sequitur ‘only two forms of citizen, naturalized or natural born’.

[LorenC]

Additionally, I have repeatedly said that I post the legal opinion of attorneys practicing in the federal courts system.

What attorneys? You haven't offered any names that I see in your post about the Natural-Born Citizen cases (where you said you were quoting an attorney), and my attempts to Google the portions of your previous post that appeared to be commentary (as opposed to quoted portions of the cases) turned up nada.

Lots of attorneys, good and bad, are licensed to practice in the federal system. The requirements are essentially 1) be a licensed attorney, and 2) get a couple of other licensed attorneys to sign your admission form, 3) pay the admissions fee, and 4) take the oath. There's no more merit involved in being licensed to practice in the federal system than in being licensed in any state's bar; just more money.

So who are the attorneys whose opinions you're relying on?