Your claiming something is a lie doesn't make it one.
Here's the quote from the dissent:
Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that "natural-born citizen" applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not.
It's clear enough that the dissent understood the majority's ruling to mean that Wong would be eligible to run for President.
And since you have falsely accused me of "lying," it is clear that YOU are the LIAR.
So every person reading this thread, from this point on, can clearly understand that anything you say can't be trusted, since you LIED in what you just said.
You are a disruptor.
Here is the statement in the holding of Wong Kim Ark that has you so excited:
“The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens…Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate…and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, ‘If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’”
And as usual, you use the same argument OBOTS use to try and justify BHO2 - that ‘citizen’ equals ‘Natural born Citizen’. How lame! It doesn’t work because that is not what Justice Gray said in the holding.
Justice Gray compares and contrasts the two children:
- he mentions the US born child of resident alien(s)
- he compares that child to the “natural-born” child of a citizen
He clearly states that only one is natural-born: the child of the citizen.
He says that both are citizens. But only the child of the citizen is natural born – for this is what he is comparing the other one to. So the holding indicates Wong Kim Ark was as much a citizen as any other citizen despite not being a Natural born Citizen.
The Wong Kim Ark Court does NOT say that the child of the alien is a Natural born Citizen.
Try getting it right next time, eh!