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

To: sometime lurker
Except, as has been pointed out to you several times, Gray did not say that. He said they were not committed to the view.

Sorry, but this is your distortion of what was said. And I'll explain again, the justices in the Slaughterhouse Cases that were cited (Miller and others) were the same judges who UNANIMOUSLY decided the Minor case which Gray said excluded NBCs from the operation of the citizen clause of the 14th amendment. The court was divided in the Slaughterhouse case, but it was NOT divided on the Minor case which rejected the 14th amendment citizenship claimed by the plaintiff. The court was committed to this view, while it was not so committed to the so-called "standard excpetions" cited in the Slaughterhouse Cases.

335 posted on 09/14/2011 7:28:11 AM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies ]


To: edge919
You quoted Gray as saying the justices were committed to the view. The complete quote says none of the justices were committed to the view.
That neither Mr. Justice Miller nor any of the justices who took part in the decision of The Slaughterhouse Cases understood the court to be committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is manifest from a unanimous judgment of the Court...
You omitted the "neither, nor" and completely changed the meaning. First I thought you were guilty merely of sloppy research, and took the quote from some other site or poster without knowing the context. Then I thought you were guilty of deliberate deception. Now that you so vigorously refuse to see the original meaning, I have to suspect you simply don't understand what you are reading.

were the same judges who UNANIMOUSLY decided the Minor case which Gray said excluded NBCs from the operation of the citizen clause of the 14th amendment.

Reading comprehension problems again. Nowhere did the judgement say that NBCs were "excluded" from the operation of the citizen clause. What they said was

They are persons, and by the Fourteenth Amendment "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" are expressly declared to be "citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." But in our opinion it did not need this amendment to give them that position.
and
in that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United states, as much so before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution as since.
So it says Virgina Minor would have been considered a citizen with or without the 14th amendment. It doesn't say that NBCs are excluded.

This is known as a composition fallacy examples of which are :

and

336 posted on 09/14/2011 8:05:24 AM PDT by sometime lurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | 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