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

To: Uncle Chip

“The English translation of 1759 did...”

No, it did not, and I’ve already posted the quote from the 1759 translation on this thread.

I wrote “Few heard of Ramsay because he was a minor figure.” He was. Not a bad guy, but not THE legal authority on the Constitution. Compared to him, we have James Madison’s comment on which is important for citizenship, birth or descent:

“It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”

James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)

The link you provide on the Supreme Court is bogus. The cases cited do not show NBC requires 2 citizen parents, nor did they attempt to.

“And then that pesky Leahy and that SR511:”

Except that applies to someone BORN OUTSIDE THE USA - NOT someone born within the jurisdiction of the US...doesn’t it? It is dishonest to post that as evidence that a person born inside the USA needs to have 2 citizens for parents.

Your info is bogus, and that is why no court takes it seriously. When someone pretends one sentence, incorrectly translated AFTER the Constitution was written, is the end all of legal meaning for NBC, it is impossible to take them seriously.


385 posted on 05/03/2010 11:45:23 AM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
The link you provide on the Supreme Court is bogus. The cases cited do not show NBC requires 2 citizen parents, nor did they attempt to.

You don't know your American history, do you???

Throughout most of the history of American immigration, particularly since 1848, a foreign woman became an American citizen upon marriage to American man.

Therefore, any child of one American parent was automatically the child of two American parents. If the father was an American citizen, then so was the mother. The two-parent requirement was automatically met if the father was a citizen.

In the light of this, let's read the Court in Minor versus Happersett during the height of the immigration movement in 1875:

"The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. 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." [Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)]

The citizenship of the father was automatically the citizenship of the mother and became the citizenship of the child. "Parents" meant daddies and mommies.

388 posted on 05/03/2010 12:28:19 PM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 385 | 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