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

To: mlo
In fact, the previous SCOTUS decisions have made it clear that a person born within the US, *regardless of the citizenship of the parents*, is natural born.

You are deliberately misstating facts. There has never been such a decision.

79 posted on 09/29/2009 10:13:47 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry
In fact, the previous SCOTUS decisions have made it clear that a person born within the US, *regardless of the citizenship of the parents*, is natural born.

"You are deliberately misstating facts. There has never been such a decision."

No, you are deliberately mistating facts.

"It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born."

"III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established."

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)


84 posted on 09/29/2009 12:27:39 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | 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