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

To: RummyChick

What’s interesting is that in the 1790 Act, they codified a definition of a Natural Born Citizen.

And since it would be unconstitutional to change by statute the definition of a Natural Born Citizen, then weren’t they simply reiterating the definition as believed by the Founders?


47 posted on 01/13/2016 10:43:37 AM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: FreeReign

Starting page 8 is a review of the situation by someone who was INS Chief COunsel - not sure if he held the title at that time.

http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2068&context=mlr

All one can do is make a reasoned argument and come to a conclusion. That conclusion doesn’t mean it was the reality.

I don’t know the answer. All I want to do is be fair to the analysis with the knowledge that James Madison is the one that took out the definition.


49 posted on 01/13/2016 10:53:36 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | 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