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

To: Seizethecarp

If a lower court deems Ark a Natural Born Citizen and SCOTUS affirms the decision without exception - what does that mean?


784 posted on 01/22/2012 7:00:23 AM PST by RummyChick (It's a Satan Sandwich with Satan Fries on the side - perfect for Obama 666)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 750 | View Replies ]


To: RummyChick; edge919; BuckeyeTexan; Spaulding; devattel
“If a lower court deems Ark a Natural Born Citizen and SCOTUS affirms the decision without exception - what does that mean?”

That clearly did not happen. In Justice Gray's own words in the intro to WKA summing up the appellant court's ruling: "The court ordered Wong Kim Ark to be discharged, upon the ground that he was a citizen of the United States. 1 Fed.Rep. 382." The lower court deemed Ark was a citizen, NOT NBC.

Gray cited Waite's language in Minor when he wrote for the majority that WKA had the same citizen rights but NBC has different birth status about which there is NO DOUBT.

Gray's opinion affirmed that Ark was “as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen.” That affirms the clear distinction between general citizen right being equal, but maintains the distinction with NBCs having unique birth status (and unique POTUS eligibility preserved).

If Gray's opinion meant that WKA was NBC he WOULD HAVE SAID SO! Gray would have said “WKA is as much an NBC as the natural-born child of a citizen” but he didn't. You do realize that the dissenting opinion claiming (falsely) that the majority was making WKA an NBC and eligible to be POTUS is NOT precedent?

805 posted on 01/22/2012 9:03:26 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 784 | 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