[philman_36]

I know Ark too. It's always about the questions...

UNITED STATES v. WONG KIM ARK.

The question presented by the record is whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who at the time of his birth are subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.' Know what I mean? Like I said, it was decided wrongly. Ark was never a slave.

[Penelope Dreadful]

You are not a sane person. Your personal opinions do not make law. You say that the 14th Amendment does not apply to anyone but former slaves, and that is about as goofy as those Sovereign Citizens who are convinced that the fringe on the courtroom flag is a matter of great importance.

The WKA Court traced the 14th Amend back to a bunch of white folks in Jolly Old England. It is all there for you to read, in great detail. I hope that you are not driving around with paper license tags, and without a drivers license because you think you are a corporation or something.

Because I think there is a form of mental illness related to people who hold bizarre legal theories.

[Lurkinanloomin]

They only decided he was a citizen, they never said he was a natural born citizen.

The words of Art II Sec. 1 makes clear there is a difference.