Wrong. Read it and weep.
Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 22 U. S. 827.
There it is. A direct quote. And notice, absolutely nothing about U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, which was 15 years earlier than this UNANIMOUS decision by the Supreme Court in Luria v. United States. And even though it says "native citizen," Minor exclusively defined native citizens as: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens. No lower court trumps this decision. All you've shown is that judges in Indiana, Arizona and Georgia are ignorant of actual Supreme Court precedence.
Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 22 U. S. 827.There it is. A direct quote. And notice, absolutely nothing about U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, which was 15 years earlier than this UNANIMOUS decision by the Supreme Court in Luria v. United States. And even though it says "native citizen," Minor exclusively defined native citizens as: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens. No lower court trumps this decision.
Excellent point!
All you've shown is that judges in Indiana, Arizona and Georgia are ignorant of actual Supreme Court precedence.
There's been a STUNNING display of ignorance from MANY involved in this unvetted president fiasco. So much so that it's hard to believe it's only sheer stupidity and not something far more sinister.