Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Linda Frances

I think it means that the writers of the Constitution used vague language in writing the rules for who could become President by using a term that did not get defined in the document. Their main goal was to make sure the President would not be loyal to another country by birth, but they wanted to leave it somewhat open because they knew situations would eventually change.

Either that, or they wrote it in so that 224 years later about 50 people would still have something to argue about that was of no consequence and with which they could impugn the reputations of the “non pure.”

As for Rubio, I would say “probably?”


63 posted on 07/16/2011 8:03:15 PM PDT by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Raider Sam; Linda Frances

>> “I think it means that the writers of the Constitution used vague language in writing the rules for who could become President by using a term that did not get defined in the document.” <<

.

A truly absurd statement for a number of reasons.

First, none of the terms used in the constitution are defined in its text, because they were terms of common usage. That is especially true for Natural Born, since the Supreme court had little difficulty coming up with the correct definition four times in succession.

Second, it is rare for a legal document to include definitions of terms unless those terms are newly created for the purpose of the document.


70 posted on 07/16/2011 8:22:49 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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