“As we see again, Ms. Elg was ‘Affirmed’ a natural born citizen and that Wong Kim Ark was NOT.”
Once again, they were not under any compulsion to decide presidential eligibility in the Ark case, and as such their failure to do so is proof of nothing. Furthermore, various quotable passages support the citizen at birth = natural born citizen case, as you know. In order to convince yourself otherswise, you have to bend over backwards and invent a previously non-existent seperate category for the “native born,” which just won’t fly, Elg or no Elg.
What I said flies with the best of them. Yours however, gets easily shot down. As an example:
I show you the Elg case where this lady was not running for president and she was declared natural born by the Supreme Court in post 224.
Here is the silly argument of yours in post 217.
- - - -
To: r9etb
“There are some around here who see this as inadequate, as it doesn’t say ‘natural born,’ so he must not be a natural born citizen.
Which is hooey.”
Exactly. They weren’t deciding presidential eligibility in the Ark case, so of course they didn’t say whether he was or not.
- - ---
- - - - -
birth = natural born citizen case, as you know.
No, foreigners who gives birth to a baby on US soil is not a natural born citizen. Go find the chart above in post 277 and enlighten yourself.
They were not under obligation to discuss it in the Elg case either, but they did. The Elg case is 40 years AFTER WKA & thus does set precedent regarding the citizenship of the parents in regards to A2S1C5.