[Seizethecarp]

The WKA court explicitly said they were ONLY ruling on whether WKA was a 14A citizen. Even the Ankeny court admitted this in a footnote. This is the whole point of Leo Donofrio’s excoriation of the Ankeny court for waiving a wand and deciding that considering WKA and the 14A “in tandem” made Obama an NBC.

I disagree with RummyChick and would rather agree to disagree with her than to rehash her argument. I prefer the conclusions of law of Donofrio and Hatfield as applied to the different facts in Minor, ARK, and Ankeny.

[RummyChick]

Too bad the Ankeny Court did not read the brief written at the time in the language of the time by The United States of America in the Wong Kim Ark case.

[bushpilot1]

You stated “WKA was a correct decision”.

Do you believe the children of aliens or an alien should be a citizen if born in the US?

Yes or No.

[DiogenesLamp]

The WKA court explicitly said they were ONLY ruling on whether WKA was a 14A citizen. Even the Ankeny court admitted this in a footnote. This is the whole point of Leo Donofrio’s excoriation of the Ankeny court for waiving a wand and deciding that considering WKA and the 14A “in tandem” made Obama an NBC

If this is the correct analysis, then it can be argued that Wong Kim Ark was decided correctly. If not, then not. Glad we cleared that up. :)

I disagree with RummyChick and would rather agree to disagree with her than to rehash her argument. I prefer the conclusions of law of Donofrio and Hatfield as applied to the different facts in Minor, ARK, and Ankeny.

I've seen Edge919 argue that Obama is NOT a 14th amendment citizen,(Which is plausible, depending on how you look at it.) and i've seen many argue that he might be. This is one of the problems with interpreting the law I think; The fact that a shading of one characteristic here or there dramatically changes what is the perceived meaning. It is splitting of hairs in some cases.