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

To: Jeff Winston
Okay. I may have overstated the case VERY SLIGHTLY by using the word "SOLELY."

You overstated your case MUCH MORE than very slightly.

The intent was to exclude: * Indians IN TRIBES (but NOT Indians who had left their tribes and joined "civilized" American society) * AND those who had always been HISTORICALLY regarded as being outside of the rule of citizenship, and who therefore had always BEEN excluded: the children of foreign ambassadors, foreign royalty, and invading armies. It is also clear that Trumbull regarded the children born here of non-citizen parents as US citizens. He understood that to be United States law.

Children born here of permanently domiciled parents, as confirmed by the U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark ruling.

Obama's father was never permanently domiciled in the U.S. He was always only in the country on a temporary basis.

421 posted on 04/04/2013 7:40:14 PM PDT by Rides3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies ]


To: Rides3

Good point!

The Wong Kim Ark ruling confirmed children born here of permanently domiciled parents are citizens.

Since Obama's father was never permanently domiciled in the United States, was always in the country on a temporary basis, and his "Application to Extend Time of Temporary Stay" is public, WKA does not apply to BHO II.

422 posted on 04/04/2013 7:51:25 PM PDT by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies ]

To: Rides3

See my comment at 424.


425 posted on 04/04/2013 8:08:20 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | 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