If you read the whole thing.
Since the Constitution does not specify what the requirements are to be a "citizen" or a "natural born citizen", the majority adopted the common law of England:
The court ruled:
It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.
U.S. Supreme Court Center
child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born. You can cite Justice Gray all you want about natural born SUBJECT which is not the same as a natural born citizen.
Justice Gray also cited Mr. Binney who made the distinction between citizens and NBCs, and cited who were natural born citizens without a doubt in Minor v. Happersett...that would contradict what you guys think that he proclaimed Wong Kim Ark a natural born citizen. Gray only affirmed him a citizen.
And common law of England is not recognized as the law of the land but a distinctive American domestic law that took its place, which recognizes the law of nations.
From a previous post.
- - - -
You can argue common law but that would still make him a natural born citizen.
I can go better. The common law of these United States is the Law of Nations for over 200 years, and the Supreme Court of the United States has acknowledged as such
The Supreme Court Opinion Sosa v. Alverez-Machain et al.
No. 03–339. Argued March 30, 2004—Decided June 29, 2004*
That's NOT English Common law as "Domestic Law" that the Supreme Court has said here.
196 posted on
Friday, November 12, 2010 8:13:03 PM by
Red Steel
