To: Hugin
And, to you, Happerset v Minor is just “legal hokum”?
26 posted on
11/14/2012 8:32:12 AM PST by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(Bread and Circuses; Everyone to the Coliseum!)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
It's not a precedent. It merely mentions that there is a legal theory about a difference between what constitutes a "natural born citizen" as opposed to "native born" citicens, then states that they don't need to rule on the theory's validity, since it's irrelevent to the issue at hand. Noting that a legal theory exists does not make it precedent.
34 posted on
11/14/2012 8:36:54 AM PST by
Hugin
("Most times a man'll tell you his bad intentions, if you listen and let yourself hear."---Open Range)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson