Replies

You still don't get it and Elk was NOT about a child born to naturalized citizens, Elk was about a Native American, born on the reservation and then left the reservation to assimilate into American life by renouncing his Native American status.

It was a 14th Amendment case and the decision of the court was that there were only 2 types of citizenship, by birth(natural born) or by naturalization because under both forms, the person only has but one allegiance to the US, one at birth, the other at naturalization upon renouncing allegiance to a former nation.

There are no sub-class of citizens according to the Constitution, one is either naturalized by an act of congress & renunciation of foreign allegiance or they are born owing a single & exclusive allegiance to the US.

And this is why EVERY case will continue to fail. Because by claiming the 14th allows for exclusive “jus soli” citizenship that renders children dual citizens, they shoot themselves in the foot by making the case for Obama. But alas, they will never see it because their egos & legal education have turned an ant hill into mountain by adopting the lies of the adversary aka “jus soli” citizenship regardless of the nationality of the father.

“You still don't get it and Elk was NOT about a child born to naturalized citizens, Elk was about a Native American, born on the reservation and then left the reservation to assimilate into American life by renouncing his Native American status.”

Uh-Oh! My ME/CFS has boggled my brain and I have conflated Elk with Elg! I hate when that happens. I better give posting a rest for the rest of the night...

I will only refer you to Leo Donofrio's work on Elk, which I find to be persuasive.

You still don't get it and Elk was NOT about a child born to naturalized citizens, Elk was about a Native American, born on the reservation and then left the reservation to assimilate into American life by renouncing his Native American status.
And the Court recognized that...

Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of and owing immediate allegiance to one of the Indiana tribes (an alien though dependent power), although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more "born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations.
This view is confirmed by the second section of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides that

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed."