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

To: trumandogz

Arguably three state courts have...New York did so in 1844:

“And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President. “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” &c. The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not...

...6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/Lynch_v_Clarke_1844_ocr.pdf


22 posted on 02/03/2012 5:46:33 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

The assistant vice-chancellor in New York ignored Supreme Court precedent from Inglis v. Sailor’s Snug Harbour that disproved his belief. There’s a reason why this case is NOT quoted as precedence.


49 posted on 02/03/2012 11:11:33 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | 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