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

To: little jeremiah; Mr Rogers; danamco
Two 19th century Supreme Court cases disagree with you as well:

Minor v. Happersett (1874)

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.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)

The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words [citizen and natural born citizen], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States....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, and 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. 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.

920 posted on 04/27/2011 10:43:10 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 872 | View Replies ]


To: Pyro7480

Wrong. Minor didn’t TRY to deal with NBC, because that wasn’t an issue.

WKA did deal with the issue, and as you point out, decided that a person born with two alien parents is indeed a natural born citizen, and thus a citizen. They used the same argument as was used in the case I cited from 1844 (and which they cited with approval).

The 1844 case goes into greater detail, showing the colonies that used natural born subject in their laws prior to the Revolution changed them to natural born citizen after the Revolution, and thus the meaning of NBS carries over into the meaning of NBC.


930 posted on 04/27/2011 10:51:57 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 920 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480; little jeremiah

So why did you eliminate mention ALL those who agree with us, very conveniently. Still remember he is a British citizen regardless he is pissing on them and not invited tomorrow. You also forget to mention that he probably still is an Indonesian citizen as well!!!


1,121 posted on 04/27/2011 1:20:40 PM PDT by danamco (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 920 | View Replies ]

To: Pyro7480
Regarding the Wong Kim Ark decision, it mistakenly quotes the British definition. This same interpretation was used by Great Britain to justify taking American sailors off American ships and pressing them into the British navy.

As I recall, we declared war on Great Britain in 1812 because we did not agree with the British definition of a natural born subject. (Notice they were talking about subjects, not citizens.)

The framer of the 14th Amendment (which formed the basis for this decision) was of the opinion that it granted "native" citizenship, not "natural born."

1,213 posted on 04/27/2011 2:26:17 PM PDT by NJ_Tom (Who ever thought that Kenya would be the next nuclear power?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 920 | 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