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

To: Just mythoughts
Yes, dear. Follow the good decision made out of that ungodly bunch called the Supremes...

So, when did they rule on the question? Please enlighten us.

Where have you been? The whole reason for threads like this is that they haven't ruled. That the meaning of Natural Born is not officially defined.

Of course, they have let enough precedent elapse that they now have only one reasonable way to rule when and if they ever get around to it. LOL!

52 posted on 04/08/2016 1:11:42 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: cynwoody
Yes, dear. Follow the good decision made out of that ungodly bunch called the Supremes...

This was a 'generic' description on who makes decisions... there was nothing noted about which decision.

The Supremes, Constitutionally can only rule if an individual meets or does not meet, the qualification of 'natural born' US citizen... They have no Constitutional authority to give or take 'natural born' US citizenship. 'Natural born' US citizenship, precedence was set by the Founders. I have NO faith the Supremes follow the 'original intent' of the Constitution.

56 posted on 04/08/2016 1:17:44 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: cynwoody

“So, when did they rule on the question? Please enlighten us.”

On numerous occasions, for example:

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857). “DANIEL, J., Separate Opinion. Mr. Justice DANIEL. . . . . [quoting Vattel] The citizens are the members of the civil society, bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority; they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.”

United State v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. “A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized....”

“Where have you been? The whole reason for threads like this is that they haven’t ruled. That the meaning of Natural Born is not officially defined.”

Natural born citizen is a legal term of art that the Congress has no power to define, according to Laurence Tribe and according to the Constitution and its limitations to the enumerated powers of Congress.


60 posted on 04/08/2016 1:37:27 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: cynwoody
-- when did they rule on the question? --

On the question of birth abroad, there are several SCOTUS rulings, all of which find that person to be naturalized. Rogers v. Bellei, Miller v. Albright and Nguyen v. INS are three more recent SCOTUS cases.

Those cases do not fully define NBC, but they do exclude those born abroad from the class of NBC.

-- ... they have let enough precedent elapse that they now have only one reasonable way to rule when and if they ever get around to it. --

Reversing the finding that those born abroad are naturalized would have a profound impact on naturalization and denaturalization cases. That doesn't mean that SCOTUS wouldn't reverse itself. It only means that such a decision has ramifications outside of presidential eligibility.

82 posted on 04/08/2016 5:43:08 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | 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