Posted on 03/17/2011 6:46:17 AM PDT by maggief
I’m good with that clarification.
I’m good with that clarification.
Nope. I believe he said there is doubt whether those born to noncitizens are NBCs, not about whether they are citizens.
He is quite right, which is why a Court decision is needed to remove that doubt.
BTW, this was the perfect place for him to point out that those born within the country to noncitizens are not NBCs. He passed it by, only noting there was some doubt on this issue.
Correct. However, I have never seen anything to indicate this would affect his legal status as a citizen one way or another.
I wonder if y'all listen to yourselves. We're Americans. We don't believe in hereditary rights. What in the world are we doing discussing whether a child born in this country to an American mother is disqualified as NBC because his mother's husband was not an American?
What if she'd been unmarried? What if she'd been gang-raped (or promiscuous) and even she didn't know who the father was? Some have speculated O senior wasn't "really" the father. Somebody named Davis has been put forward, if I remember correctly. And I believe he was NBC, which would give O two NBC parents.
Do we really want such factors to impact the citizenship status of the innocent child born as a result?
It doesn’t impact citizenship, Sherman Logan. It impacts qualification for the office of President, one requirement of which is based upon the nature of candidate’s citizenship. There’s a difference between the two.
There are qualification requirements based upon the nature of candidate’s citizenship for other elected, national offices as well. Do you have issues with these, too? If not, why not?
Read it again:
... it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
These are the natural born citizens. They become citizen upons their birth.
Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
"This class" are children born without reference to the parents' citizenship. Their citizenship is in doubt. He does not suggest that they are natural born citizens, only that they might be citizens. This a distinct class from the group that he says is NBCs. For what you believe to make sense, he would have need to have changed the order of his sentences:
... it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also.Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.He is quite right, which is why a Court decision is needed to remove that doubt.
This court decision did remove the doubt as well as the Wong Kim Ark decision. Children born of noncitizen parents can be citizens via the 14th amendment (and later statutory means), but they are NOT natural born citizens.
BTW, this was the perfect place for him to point out that those born within the country to noncitizens are not NBCs.
Well, no, this was the perfect place to make an AFFIRMATIVE declaration that 14th amendment citizens are natural born citizens because Virginia Minor claimed she was a 14th amendment citizen. Justice Waite rejected the claim. He used a definition that is clear and limited. Justice Gray used that same definition and AFFIRMED it in Wong Kim Ark.
Not according to the preamble to the Constitution which was established for "ourselves and our Posterity."
“It is easily provable that his father was not a citizen. If that was the requirement for natural born status, then certainly Hillary, Edwards, McCain or someone else would have brought this up.”
It’s likewise provable that Bill&Hill were actually the first “Birthers” and they were effectively slapped with the Race card!
Edwards was busy with his female video photographer!!
McPain had his own problem with Senate Res. 511 and “handcuffed”/muzzled Palin. It was widely brought up during the election, and then suddenly the media went AWOL, having Glenn Book, Coulter and slew of other “blonds” at FAUX attack you viciously verbally when the issue was brought up. “Conservative”(?) talk hosts would block you e-mail access to them when confronted with the issues. Jack Maskall took care of Congress and Judge Clarence Thomas is “EVADING” this issue!!!
Apparently you missed some incriminating comments published at CFP???
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13373
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.