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

To: Squeeky
Uh. . .dude. . .YOU'RE saying it. How in the world can part of the 14th Amendment NOT apply to probably 250 million plus Americans, and not hardly anybody know it???

Take it up with the Supreme Court:

There is no doubt that women may be citizens. 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.

Do you understand?? This is where you nod your head up and down. Women did not need the 14th amendment to given them citizenship because there was another way to determine citizenship: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens.

Where are the cases that quote Minor Happersett to prove that the 14th Amendment does not apply to most Americans???

In Wong Kim Ark. This has been shown.

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, delivered but two years later, while all those judges but Chief Justice Chase were still on the bench, in which Chief Justice Waite said: "Allegiance and protection are, in this connection" (that is, in relation to citizenship),
reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation for the other: allegiance for protection, and protection for allegiance. . . . 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 [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.

Read the part underlines. It cuts to the chase. It is supported by the context of both the WKA and Minor decisions. Read it. Learn it. Understand it.

530 posted on 10/18/2011 12:30:57 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies ]


To: edge919
There you go, pretending to be a lawyer again, and cutting and pasting like a monkey. You have just cut and pasted some more gibberish that does NOT have anything to do with you goofy theory that the 14th Amendment does not apply to most Americans.

If you just cut and paste stuff, that you have misinterpreted, it does not provide "proof" to rational people who do not share YOUR delusions. I have no doubt your mouse works, and you can cut and paste as long as you can move your hands. But, that doesn't mean that anything you cut and paste has any relationship to REALITY.

Which, you still have not answered my question. If you say the 14th Amendment does NOT provide citizenship to people in America who are born of citizen parents, then what is the source of out citizenship???

532 posted on 10/18/2011 1:09:19 PM PDT by Squeeky ("Truth is so rare that it is delightful to tell it. " Emily Dickinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | 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