Indiana Supreme Court had no problem with that holding. So, yes, the issue was heard and ruled on as a matter of law and the case was dismissed—in part, because Obama is an NBC. Wrong and wrong.
First, that's a false assumption. The state supreme court most likely didn't want to embarrass the Indiana appeals court because their opinion isn't worth dog poop. For what ever reasons they did not review it - you don't know and are jumping to conclusions. Second, the Indiana Court contradicts itself by stating Wong Kim Ark was not found to be a natural born citizen and then they cherry pick Blackstone using his natural born SUBJECT commentary as being the same as a natural born citizen that has the same meaning as the US Constitution NBC clause. Tsk Tsk...so much BS in the Indiana opinion, it is all bull-crap. It will never hold up to any scrutiny.
BP2 to Parsnips: LOL. Swing and strike.
Parsy it was game over for you awhile ago. You're still here - you lied.
First, that’s a false assumption. The state supreme court most likely didn’t want to embarrass the Indiana appeals court because their opinion isn’t worth dog poop.
ASSUMPTION=”The state supreme court most likely didn’t . . .”
For the last time, from Ankeny:
The Birfers: “Contrary to the thinking of most people on the subject, there’s a very clear distinction between a ‘citizen of the United States’ and a ‘natural born citizen.’(page 12)”
The Ankeny Court: “Based upon the language of Art. II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “Natural Born Citizens” for Art. II, section 1. purposes, regardless of the citizenship of the parents.” (Page 17)”
That’s ONE SENTENCE. Pretty hard to get wrong. It’s LAW. Its PUBLISHED.
Born within the borders=NBC, regardless of parental citizenship
parsy