Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WOSG
You are incorrect.

In 1898, in the Wong Kim Ark case, the Supreme Court reexamined the "citizenship-by-birthplace-alone" theory, but did not decide whether it applied to natural born citizenship. The Court ruled that Mr. Ark was a citizen, but did not rule that he was a natural born citizen (SCOTUS in 'Wong Kim Ark').

” ‘At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, 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. 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. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ Minor v. Happersett (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168.”

617 posted on 07/31/2009 8:13:39 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]


To: Eagle Eye

“You are incorrect”

No, he’s not. Everyone knows the Wong Kim Ark decision was about citizenship at birth, not specifically presidential eligibility. But since there is nothing in the law or common sense that says to be a natural born citizen means anything but to be a citizen by right of birth, it follows that Wong Kim Ark solidified a reading of the 14th amendment whereby children born on U.S. territory are natural born citizens.

The problem with looking to people like Vattel is that he says things like the following, which is completely at odds with U.S. law at least since the passage of the 14th amendment:

“I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

Except we all know very well that children born in the U.S., and under it’s jurisdiction, are natives and are citizens. It is their country, too. It’s not just that to Vattel only the children of citizens are natural born citizens. It is that only the children of citizens are citizens. This is not our system.


674 posted on 07/31/2009 10:23:26 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson