WRONG...there is natural citizenship in which no law is required, it's called ‘natural law’ hence the term natural. You get it? NATURAL as in NATURE not STATUTE aka positive law. It requires both parents to be citizens. Then there is citizenship by statute which is what Gray's erroneous opinion referred to in WKA and then you have the naturalized citizens. According to the Declaration & the Constitution, our Federal Union was founded on the “Laws of Nature & of Nature's God” which states that children follow the nationality of the parent(S), not that of the soil as the sovereignty of the Federal Union does not reside in the Federal Government, but in the people of the states. Under natural law, consent of the individual is required and an alien is NOT a sovereign member of our society, thus they can not consent for their children to be members because they hold no political right to do so and neither does the government hold any right to confer citizenship on any individual other than by statute or naturalization. PERIOD!
CITIZENSHIP EITHER FLOWS THROUGH NATURALLY THROUGH THE PARENTS(PLURAL, UNLESS BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK) OT IT COMES VIA THE LAW. BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP TO BABIES BORN TO ALIEN PARENTS in the USA, REGARDLESS OF THE PARENTS LEGAL STATUS, IS CITIZENHIP BY FIAT & NOT BY NATURE DUE TO JUDICIAL ACTIVISM, NOT ACTUAL LAW RATIFIED BY WE THE PEOPLE!
“CITIZENSHIP EITHER FLOWS THROUGH NATURALLY THROUGH THE PARENTS(PLURAL, UNLESS BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK) OT IT COMES VIA THE LAW.”
Ah, the old “naturalized at birth” argument. Citizenship of the blood and nothing else. Well, not to depress you, but there is no such thing a purely “natural” U.S. citizen (that is, a citizen by parents and not by law). That’s because the U.S. is not natural. It came into being via positive law: namely, the Constitution. No one on earth is a U.S. citizen otherwise than by law.
“BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP TO BABIES BORN TO ALIEN PARENTS in the USA, REGARDLESS OF THE PARENTS LEGAL STATUS, IS CITIZENHIP BY FIAT & NOT BY NATURE DUE TO JUDICIAL ACTIVISM, NOT ACTUAL LAW RATIFIED BY WE THE PEOPLE!”
Hold on, the 14th amendment was ratified by judicial activism? What?
“WRONG...there is natural citizenship in which no law is required”
Ahem, in ALL cases the law is required, since ‘citizenship’ is a legal construct.
If what you say is true, the 14th amendment clause would be superfluous yet it was not, since we didnt grant citizenship to many who you claim would acquire it where ‘no law is required’.
We are a nation of laws, starting with the Constitution on down. All these citizenship rules are and must be based on law, not some vague view of what the laws of nature are. there is no ‘law of nature and God’s law’ that requires children to follow parental allegiances, or every immigrant would be breaking God’s law. Absurd.