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

To: MrZippy2k

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


3 posted on 05/08/2010 11:01:44 AM PDT by dixjea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dixjea

I think they are talking about births in Indian Casino Lavatories?


4 posted on 05/08/2010 11:03:52 AM PDT by central_va ( http://www.15thvirginia.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: dixjea

If not even native americans can be considered “natural born”. Who the hell else can be called “natural born” citizen ?!? Neither Obama nor McCain were able to calm doubts about their “natural born” citizenship but were eligible as president of the US of A ! A NATIVE american is now considered not only non-”natural born” but not a citizen at all by supreme court. How can something like this happen ?

I’d guess we’ll need a more water proof definition by law of the terms “beeing a citizen” and beeing “natural born”.


9 posted on 05/08/2010 11:22:07 AM PDT by buzzer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

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

Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States, members of and owing immediate allegiance to one of the Indiana tribes (an alien though dependent power), although in a geographical sense born in the United States, are no more "born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign governmentborn within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations.

The last couple of clauses in the court's opinion make the argument that those born to foreign citizens are not US citizens even if they are born in the territorial United States. It doesn't just apply to the citizens of Indian Tribes. This opinion says that birthright citizenship based on ius soli.

23 posted on 05/08/2010 12:18:28 PM PDT by old republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: dixjea

“Reservations,” perhaps?

Don’t know, but they have their own recognized governments and laws, and under the BIA of the USG, so, they are, sort of, Indian Territories. ?


42 posted on 05/08/2010 2:41:09 PM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: dixjea

Many Indian tribes live on federally-protected reservations. I know you’ll hate to hear this, but the SCOTUS a long time ago has determined that Indian tribes are sovereign nations within the meaning of the word. Both liberal and conservative courts have continued to up hold the rulings.


62 posted on 05/08/2010 7:49:56 PM PDT by righttackle44 (Is Obama an Irish, Italian or Japanese name?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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