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

To: browardchad; John Valentine
Uh, no. It has never been actually defined in the context of Section 1 Article 2,

Oh -- so then for 220 years of American electoral history, no one running for the Presidency knew what it meant???? It was just a coincidence that all of them except one met the qualifications of "natural born citizen" defined by Justice Marshall in The Venus case as early as 1824???

so it therefore defaults to the accepted interpretation, in the year of 2010, of what a natural born citizen is:

Oh --- so then we in 2010 get to change the meaning of the words of a document written 220 years ago??? Can we change the definition again in 4 years and 4 years after that???

Isn't it true that your real name is Humpty Dumpty???

106 posted on 02/19/2010 10:13:20 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip
"It was just a coincidence that all of them except one met the qualifications of "natural born citizen" defined by Justice Marshall in The Venus case as early as 1824???"

Huh?

The Venus case never even mentions "natural born citizens." So how could it define it?
133 posted on 02/19/2010 12:20:49 PM PST by EnderWiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | 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