What reason do you provide besides dragging in a maggot infested dead rat of a ruling. In fact as ANY HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL OR GREATER READER who has read this thread is already aware, my summary was based on the redaction, commentary and extracts of a twenty plus year discussion in a New York newspaper. No where in that was Wonk King Ark mentioned.
In your first idiotic post to me in this thread you made the embarrassingly stupid on your part comment that somehow I had not read the Constitution.
That was an stupid comment because you weren’t talking about the Constitution at all you were talking about a dead rat of a decision by the Court. The Court does not have the last say, you know. It is We the People who in the end decide what the Constitution will mean in practice.
By that idiot’s logic you also say that the Constitution says a negro is not a full human entitled to basic human rights because the of Dred Scott. Dred Scott was a defective interpretation of the Constitution.
More vindictive blather in place of thought.
YOUR interpretation of the Constitution doesn’t count for squat. Nor, for that matter, does the interpretation of a newspaper.
The Supreme Court’s interpretation DOES matter, and it is settled law that someone born in the USA is naturally a born citizen.
In matters of the Law, the Supreme Court DOES have the last say, and the large majority of people accept that. “We The People” is your pretense that you speak for the majority will of the USA - in spite of the fact that Obama’s father’s foreignness was well known when a comfortable majority of the US voted for him.
“By that idiot’s logic you also say that the Constitution says a negro is not a full human entitled to basic human rights because the of Dred Scott. Dred Scott was a defective interpretation of the Constitution.”
Ever hear of the 14th Amendment? Why was it written? Do you know what an Amendment does?