Replies

"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. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens."

Danae:

Even Leo D'Onofrio, whom you and I both admire, admits that Waite's statement "it is not necessary to resolve these doubts" means that Obama's NBC issue has not been resolved as of Wong. That can only mean that based on Minor and Wong it cannot be stated with certainty that Obama is NOT NBC, only that there is doubt that he is NBC.

That doesn't mean that in the future, perhaps as a result of D'Onofrio's quo warranto, Obama might be declared by SCOTUS to NOT be an NBC. I would expect a 5-4 ruling on that.

Tublecane and Non-Sequitur:

Waite's comments are not meaningless. Waite clearly distinguishes between two potential definitions of natural born citizen.

For one definition (two citizen parents in US jurisdiction) "there is no doubt". That lack of doubt is not meaningless, it is a certainty for this class.

Waite used the descriptor "some" to describe those "authorities" who extend the NBC definition to require only birth within US jurisdiction about which there is "doubt". The words "some authorities" denotes a clear minority and a minority whose opinion is in doubt per Waite.

Thus Obama is now a sitting president whose eligibility is supported by a doubtful minority view. Waite clearly signaled that if the Minor case had required a decision on the definition of what NBC meant, the doubtful minority view would likely have been rejected! Otherwise, why would Waite have called it "doubtful"? Birthers find this to be meaningful and seek clarity from the current SCOTUS.

Waite's comments are not meaningless. Waite clearly distinguishes between two potential definitions of natural born citizen.

Potential. And then he does nothing to clarify the matter.

Thus Obama is now a sitting president whose eligibility is supported by a doubtful minority view.

And who says that's the minority view?

“Waite clearly signaled that if the Minor case had required a decision on the definition of what NBC meant, the doubtful minority view would likely have been rejected! Otherwise, why would Waite have called it ‘doubtful’?”

Perhaps because a court has never ruled on the matter. The fact that there is doubt doesn’t mean the other side would’ve won the day. All it need mean is that there’s relative doubt (i.e. when you compare it to jus sangini, jus soli is more doubtful). That’s to be expected, given the longer pedigree.