Yeah, and you clipboarded information that was not under consideration in the case. The question to the court was “Was WKA a citizen at birth?” And their answer was yes, he was a citizen at birth because his parents were not working on behalf of the Chinese empire and he was born in the US.
What you are doing is being intentionally deceitful by leaving off the actual ruling that the case was about because it doesnt fit your platform. You are attempting to confuse people by saying that because children of 2 citizens were natural born, that no one else can be. And that is simply not true.
>> “The question to the court was “Was WKA a citizen at birth?” And their answer was yes, he was a citizen at birth because his parents were not working on behalf of the Chinese empire and he was born in the US.” <<
.
No, you missed that one too.
WKA had 14th ammendment citizenship because he was born here legally to a mother that had a valid resident visa.
The WKA decision even coined a name for that level of citizenship, and it was not “natural born,” it was “native citizen.”
>> “You are attempting to confuse people by saying that because children of 2 citizens were natural born, that no one else can be. And that is simply not true” <<
.
Then so were the school systems of the entire country, since the textbooks used to teach the US constitution to eigth graders held that very same definition for over 80 years, until they stopped even teaching the constitution.
You must be from the un-taught generation.