According to Minor v Happersett the issue of having two citizen parents is fundamental for NBC. The judge said that there are other citizens who are not NBC. He also said that there are those who claim citizenship for anyone born in U.S. territory regardless of the parents’ status as citizens and says that that assertion is in doubt but that there is no doubt that one born to two citizen parents is a NBC.
Minor v Happersett has had no impact on any lawsuit challenging Zero’s eligibility. It was a women’s suffrage case.
Zero’s defenders also use Minor v Happersett for their cause with the statement: “The Constitution does not in so many words say who shall be a natural born citizen. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.”
And those trying to get the Courts to rule Zero ineligible use the next section of the Supreme Court’s decision for their side of the arguement: “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.”
Zero’s defenders then use the next section for their side:
“Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.
And those trying to get Zero ruled ineligible pick up with the next section of the decision in Minor v Happersett for their side: “As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
And the next sentence is used by Zero’s liberal lawyers to show that Minor v Happersett is NOT binding precedent: “For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.”
And the final sentence is stressed by the Obama is ineligible side of the legal debate: “It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
We have to remember that liberal lawyers and liberal judges are going to hear what they want to hear and twist words and stress parts that are out of context. It’s what they do.