Are you really this dumb?? What part of “until I started noticing how Gray would never directly come out and say Ark was a natural-born citizen” do you NOT understand?? Was it something I read on the Internet?! Well duh. The WKA decision IS posted on the Internet. That’s where I’ve read and have quoted it in saying: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens ... these are the natives or natural born citizens.
1. How do YOU address the fact that the Minor judges did not REACH (which is a new word I just learned about legal stuff) the issue of children born here of foreigners???
2.Why do YOU think the Minor court defined NBC, when the Minor Court people did not say so in either the decision or the syllabus. AND Why do you think the Minor Court decided the 14th amendment made a NEW CLASS of citizenship, when those judges did not say so in either the syllabus or the decision???
3. What gives YOU the right, as a single solitary person, who is not a lawyer or judge, to tell people here about a legal theory which says that Mark Rubio and Bobby Jindal are NOT eligible to run for president or VP, WITHOUT TELLING EVERYBODY HERE, that this is just your theory, and maybe they should get a second opinion from a real lawyer, because courts disagree with you??? Because that sounds reasonable to me, that you should tell people this.
Here is the syllabus FROM THE MINOR COURT to make it easier for you about what they did decide:
1. The word "citizen" is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation.
2. In that sense, women, of 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.
3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had.
4. At the time of the adoption of that amendment, suffrage was not coextensive with the citizenship of the States; nor was it at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.
5. Neither the Constitution nor the fourteenth amendment made all citizens voters.
6. A provision in a State constitution which confines the right of voting to "male citizens of the United States," is no violation of the Federal Constitution. In such a State women have no right to vote.
Where are the numbers 7 and 8 or more you think are there??? Wouldn't they be there if they ruled it, because those same Minor Judges believe:
So important a change in the condition of citizenship as it actually existed, if intended, would have been expressly declared.