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

To: edge919

The decision in Minor would have been identical IF they HAD declared that the 14th made her a citizen. The source of her citizenship - NBC, 14th or naturalization - was irrelevant to the decision. Thus it was not a citizenship case. The source of citizenship had nothing to do with the decision.

Wiki often gives a good, simple summary - and I was hoping a good, simple summary would help you. I’ve long known you cannot read 1-2 sentences, written in adult English, without totally screwing them up.


1,546 posted on 03/16/2013 9:17:04 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1544 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
The decision in Minor would have been identical IF they HAD declared that the 14th made her a citizen.

You're not helping your argument. All this does is beg the question as to why they didn't just accept her argument, and it still doesn't address why Wong Kim Ark said her citizenship was due to birth to citizen parents. Remember, Justice Gray took exception to inclusion of "consuls" in the Slaughterhouse decision, but he took NO EXCEPTION to Minor's inclusion citizen parents in determing Viriginia Minor's citizenship. Again, YOU CAN'T GET AROUND THIS. Sourcing Wiki does NOT trump Wong Kim Ark's DIRECT CITATION of the holding. All you're doing is making a fool of yourself.

1,547 posted on 03/16/2013 9:21:04 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1546 | 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