Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: John Valentine
"Please don't quote me Wong Kim Ark, a badly reasoned, wrongly decided case that is not, repeat, NOT on point."

You don't get to pretend a Supreme Court decision doesn't exist because you disagree with it. Doesn't work that way. And it is very much on point.

They were deciding Wong's status. That quote is part of the line of reasoning in reaching that determination. What they wrote there very much applied to Wong. More importantly, it appies to anyone born in the United States. It's quite clear. You can't claim somehow what is written there doesn't include someone born in Hawaii.

"First it is simply stupid to say that the English rule was in effect in the English Colonies. Of course it was. That's why we fought a revolution."

It's noted that you think a large number of judges that have served in the US throughout its history are "stupid", but that says more about Birther legal analysis than it does those judges.

We fought a revolution to be independent of British RULE, not the principles of Brithish LAW. Two different things. We did in fact inherit the traditions of Britain's legal system, and much of English Common Law. You may recall discussions about the historical meanings of "high crimes and misdemeanors" during Clinton's impeachment.

You are mistaken, and are basically taking the position that it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court says, you disagree, so you are right. I don't think so.

"And we're left with people like you who hew to a nonsense line so strictly as to make one wonder if such loyalty is bought and paid for."

The nonsense line is thinking that you overrule the Supreme Court. It makes one wonder if such loyalty is bought and paid for by Obama to make conservatives look bad.

84 posted on 10/16/2009 11:23:48 AM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]


To: mlo

Again, I believe you are profoundly wrong to put so much faith in Wong Kim Ark, perhaps the most notoriously wrongheaded Supreme Court decision of all time, but no matter how bad that decision might have been, it had NOT ONE THING to do with “natural born citizenship”.

In fact the Supreme Court has never had a case on point come before it, only tangential ones such as Wong Kim Ark and maybe a half dozen others, and NONE of the decisions support the notion that anything born in a catbox is, without further examination, undoubtedly a cat. Never.


85 posted on 10/16/2009 4:42:09 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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