Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: edge919
Who cares what you said in April?

Right now, we're talking about the points you made in your original comment on this thread that said nothing about "legal precedent," which was the essential point of Leo's article.

I’ve been citing the Minor decision and its definition of NBC for months, as well as the affirmation of that decision in Wong Kim Ark that the Minor decision recognized citizenship on the combined basis of BOTH jus soli and jus sanguinis criteria.

119 posted on 06/21/2011 11:01:01 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. *4192*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]


To: BuckeyeTexan
Who cares what you said in April?

Right now, we're talking about the points you made in your original comment on this thread that said nothing about "legal precedent," which was the essential point of Leo's article.

You needed to warn me that you weren't too good with English and comprehension. I said that Wong Kim Ark (the Supreme Court decision, not the person) affirmed and followed the precedent in a previous Supreme Court decision (which was the Minor decision). That IS legal precedent.Can't wait to see your next silly comeback.

196 posted on 06/22/2011 12:44:33 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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