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

To: bushpilot1

Interesting definition. You find it reflected in court cases of the 19th century.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898): Wong Kim Ark was the son of two resident Chinese aliens who could not naturalize as U.S. citizens due to a treaty between the Emperor of China and the U.S. Government forbidding such naturalizations. They were, however, permanent resident aliens.

Wong claimed U.S. Citizenship by basis of his birth in the U.S.A. He was vindicated by the Supreme Court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly of the decision in Minor vs. Happersett: “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.

On the basis of the 14th Amendment the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A. under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.) but it DID NOT extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen” to those whose parents were not citizens at the time of the child’s birth.

So called anchor babies born here of illegal aliens can not become President.

In addition, Natural Born Citizenship is NOT a type of citizenship! It is but a circumstance of birth, and the only place it appears in U.S. law is in the U.S. Constitution as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President.


12 posted on 06/12/2010 7:55:10 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO Foreign Nationals as our President!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SatinDoll

Under the immigration laws of the 1800’s , the same as today. A child born to parents who have immigrated(implied allegiance) to the U.S. but not yet U.S. citizens is a Native born citizen. Ark’s parents had legally immigrated(implied allegiance) to the U.S. and under the law at that time was a native born citizen. In the opinion of the court Ark was declared a native born citizen equal to that of natural born citizens. The Supreme did state that there was a distinction between Natural and Native born. The court still upheld that belief that citizenship is directly related to allegiance. Children of illegals have no allegiance therefore no citizenship.


40 posted on 06/12/2010 9:43:56 PM PDT by omegadawn (qualified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | 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