[xvq2er]

Ping

[dixjea]

asnd since the Indian Territories no longer exist, whats your point.

[so_real]

Perhaps regrettably, those that came between us and the Founders have meddled with citizenship to the point where, in most cases, birth within the nation does afford the child citizenship -- "anchorbabyhood". But ... at no point in our national history has an attempt been made to redefine "natural born citizen". And that is where Obama fails muster -- "dual citizen" and "natural born citizen" are incompatible concepts at their very cores.

[ought-six]

Kids born within the geographic US to parents who are foreign nationals are subject to the jurisdiction of their parents’ nations, not the US. Ergo, just because a kid is physically born in the US does does automatically bestow citizenship on that kid.

[HighlyOpinionated]

bttt

[AuntB]

"Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons." Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866."Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."

Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.

http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=Howard+Jacob

[joseph20]

I think it is possible to be a birth citizen while falling short of the “natural born” definition.

[vicar7]

The exclusion of native Americans from citizenship was eventually eliminated by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

[La Enchiladita]

Chief Justice Taney? What “supreme court” are we talking about here?

Another thing: look up the difference between ‘boarder’ and ‘border.’

I didn’t read the rest of it... amigo.

[HiJinx]

Ping!

[muawiyah]

Te reason you become a citizen upon birth in this country (unless otherwise specified by treaty) is due to a ruling by the immigration people at State Department.

For whatever reason they clean plumb done forgot all about their rule that if you are born here of a foreign mother (on a visa) you must be added to that visa within so many number of days.

At first glance that doesn't say anything about "citizenship". Then you realize American citizens don't need visas to be in the US, but foreigners do ~ and there it is ~ a visa.

We probably have 30 million people in this country who are still waiting on their mothers, grand mothers and great grandmothers to add somebody to their visas to clarify the matter.

Most likely they didn't bother to get visas in the first place, but that doesn't seem to exempt anybody from the law!

[call meVeronica]

bump & ping

[justiceseeker93]

Your blog is historically confusing. You cite Elk v. Wilkins, then quote Chief Justice Taney, supposedly on that case. But Taney died during the Civil War and Elk v. Wilkins was an 1884 case. Obviously a disconnect there.

[shadowland]

Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 made Taney’s point moot. Not to mention the 14th Amendment is pretty clear:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Not any wriggle room there.

Taney’s court also promulgated the Dred Scott decision - the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were all answers to that courts decisions.

[Uncle Chip]

Some important words from Justice Gray in the Elk decision that the Obamabots and Anchorbabybots conveniently ignore:

The main object of the opening sentence of the fourteenth amendment was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes, (Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393;) and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 73; Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 306.

Thus the 14th Amendment had nothing to do with creating a new class of anchorbaby citizens per Justice Gray's own words. It was intended to establish the citizenship of former slaves.

This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared [112 U.S. 94, 102] to be citizens are 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.' The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.

Can this be said of Barack Obama's father or the parents of anchorbabies or someone who admits on his website that he was born subject to a foreign nation's nationality act???