child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born. You can cite Justice Gray all you want about natural born SUBJECT which is not the same as a natural born citizen.
Justice Gray also cited Mr. Binney who made the distinction between citizens and NBCs, and cited who were natural born citizens without a doubt in Minor v. Happersett...that would contradict what you guys think that he proclaimed Wong Kim Ark a natural born citizen. Gray only affirmed him a citizen.
And common law of England is not recognized as the law of the land but a distinctive American domestic law that took its place, which recognizes the law of nations.
From a previous post.
- - - -
You can argue common law but that would still make him a natural born citizen.
I can go better. The common law of these United States is the Law of Nations for over 200 years, and the Supreme Court of the United States has acknowledged as such
The Supreme Court Opinion Sosa v. Alverez-Machain et al.
No. 03–339. Argued March 30, 2004—Decided June 29, 2004*
That's NOT English Common law as "Domestic Law" that the Supreme Court has said here.
196 posted on
Friday, November 12, 2010 8:13:03 PM by
Red Steel
“And common law of England is not recognized as the law of the land but a distinctive American domestic law that took its place, which recognizes the law of nations.”
The point that domestic American law recognizes international law but not English common law is at best a triviality, at worst a gross distortion. Obviously, English law has no direct authority. But where do you think we got most of our ideas from?
International law is respected, but it also is NOT domestic law, which differs from it as much as two nations differ from eachother in any aspect but retain similar rules governing trade, piracy, etc. Both Protestant parliamentary Britain and Catholic autocratic Spain, for instance, at the time would’ve assented to the same international laws. But is that more significant than what the U.S. and Britain shared among the laws that governed its own people? No.
References among the founders to Vattel, by the way, would drown in a sea of Blackstone if both could be converted into water.
