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

To: RegulatorCountry
You’re hanging your hat upon some presumed wide variability of the rights and obligations associated with marriage under the common law?

No. I'm trying to remind you that the term "common law" refers to judge-made law that developed over centuries one case at a time. Much of our contract, tort and property law was developed one case at a time by judges, and decisions in one case were ordinarily treated as precedent for the resolution of subsequent cases that could not be distinguished by some important different fact. Those opinions were in writing and the important principles in those cases formed the body of what we call the "common law."

When legislatures want to alter, "improve" or supplement this case-made common law, they pass statutes. When a statute conflicts with the common law, a court is to interpret and apply the statute instead of the common law.

Our Constitution is not part of the common law. It was not the creation of judges or courts. Our Constitution provides the basic framework for our political, legislative and judicial institutions. Whenever there is a conflict, it takes precedence over all statutes and common law. A local government cannot control the meaning of the terms of the Constitution by adopting a local rule, whether that rule is created by a local legislature (statute) or by a local court (common law).

I think you will have a very difficult time finding any evidence that any of our Founding Fathers thought that a child born in the United States could only be a "natural born citizen" if:

1) Both of his parents were citizens of the United States at the time of the child's birth; and

2) In order to determine which man (real father or mother's husband) should be treated as the father for determining NBC status, we would all be bound by the local rule that was in effect in the locality where the child was born.

If there were Founding Fathers who believed that the citizenship of both parents was determinative of NBC status for a child born in the United States, I believe that they would have felt that the citizenship of the real father was the important factor. National citizenship is inherently a national issue. Whether a child born in the United States is or is not a NBC at birth should be determined with reference to a national standard and NBC status should not depend upon which county or state the birth occurred.

1,410 posted on 03/13/2013 8:52:54 PM PDT by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1408 | View Replies ]


To: Tau Food

What is a common law marriage, Tau Food?


1,412 posted on 03/13/2013 8:57:42 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1410 | View Replies ]

To: Tau Food
Consult a legal dictionary pertaining to common law marriage, and you'll likely find:

The American colonies rejected the requirement of a religious ceremony but retained the custom of a ceremony, religious or otherwise. The ancient Roman concept of marriage by agreement and cohabitation was adopted by early American courts as valid under the Common Law.

1,413 posted on 03/13/2013 9:07:00 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1410 | 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