Wrong. He did when he cited Minor v. Happersett. "all children, born in a country of [p680] 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." This definition does not extend to anyone but those born in the country of citizen parents. Period.
Just becaue the 14th amendment establishes his citizenship does not mean that the common law argument doesn't do it as well.
Nonsense. The common law argument was used in support of the court's view on the 14th amendment. And the court specifically cited the 14th amendment citizenship phrase as being the decisive factor, not common law.
What you cited on the law of England from the decision doesn't make WKA a natural born citizen, nor did the North Carolina citation even mention the term natural born citizen. Don't make this so easy. The person striking out is you.
Actual, he never quotes the passage in Minor your cite. All he does is say Minor resorted to common law.
So at your second at bat, you have another strike: Justice Gray, contrary to your assertions, NEVER defines natural born citizenship to require citizen parents in the case of a child born overseas..
"all children, born in a country of [p680] 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."
There you go again, ripping Minor out of context. The very next sentence totally undermines your argument, so I dare you to post it. Will you accept the challange?
This definition does not extend to anyone but those born in the country of citizen parents. Period.
Justice Waite's very next sentence puts the lie to that claim. No wonder you continue to rip his words out of context.
Nonsense. The common law argument was used in support of the court's view on the 14th amendment. And the court specifically cited the 14th amendment citizenship phrase as being the decisive factor, not common law.
Not true. The court used BOTH arguments.
What you cited on the law of England from the decision doesn't make WKA a natural born citizen,
To any person literate in English above the 8th grade level, it clearly does, your baseless denials notwithstanding.