Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Plummz
The Founders obviously rejected British citizenship concepts along with their British citizenship.

How do you know that? And even if it were true that the Founders intended to reject "British citizenship concepts," why is that relevant? We care not about intent; we care only about what a reasonable person in 1788 would have understood "natural-born citizen" to have meant.

Would he have defined it based on a specific French-to-English translation of a Swiss legalist's writings? Or would he have defined it much as how "natural-born subject" had been defined in English common law for centuries leading to the ratification?

There's a reason why in Minor Chief Justice Waite resorted to "common law" and not de Vattel to ascertain the meaning of "natural-born citizen."

99 posted on 04/30/2011 8:38:41 PM PDT by Abd al-Rahiim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: Abd al-Rahiim
We care not about intent;

Thank you for admitting you are an anti-American scumbag.

276 posted on 05/04/2011 9:25:45 PM PDT by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson