[edge919]

I'm not the one with an honesty problem. (Cough, quote butcher, cough.)

Actually you ARE (cough, cough, dishonest namecaller.) No one butchered any quotes and I backed it up several times and explained EXACTLY how and why you were wrong. I'll do it again because I love to rub it in.

The case was about a citizen by statute.

That's what I just said. Is there some part of "The quote from RvB ONLY refers to statutory law" that you didn't understand??

But the quote is clear enough - the United States follow the English concept, jus soli.

... "in this area" of "our law." The statement was qualified. The Supreme Court in WKA said NBC is defined outside the law, so it's NOT talking about the same thing. Read it. Learn it. Understand it. You're not comprehending and acknowledging the words that were used.

And jus soli means "born on the soil = natural born."

Wrong. It does NOT mean natural-born. The Supreme Court said in at least TWO decisions that natural-born = born in the country to parents who were its citizens. The court was UNANIMOUS on this definition in Minor. You're trying to connect dots that were NEVER connected by the court. Never.

[sometime lurker]

You tried to explain away your butchered quote several times, unconvincingly. Face it, when you remove "neither...nor" from the beginning, it reverses the meaning.

You trumpet an ambiguous quote from Minor, a case which was not about children of aliens, but you won't accept a straightforward quote from RvB because it wasn't about citizen born on the soil. Not very consistent, are you? I will quote for you again, explaining line by line, since you are not comprehending (or refusing to comprehend, most likely)

We thus have an acknowledgment that our law in this area follows English concepts with an acceptance of the jus soli, that is, that the place of birth governs citizenship status except as modified by statute.

Point by point

• "Our law in this area" - the law of the United States in the matter of citizenship.
• "follows English concepts" As many legal scholars, jurists, and even current SCOTUS Justice Scalia have said, much of US law is derived from the English common law, and Constitutional interpretation often uses English common law.
• "acceptance of jus soli" Jus soli means "born on the soil. In English common law, born on the soil = natural born. I refer you to TUAN ANH NGUYEN v. INS, where Justice Scalia was questioning:

  I'm just referring to the meaning of natural born within the Constitution. I don't think you're disagreeing. It requires jus soli, doesn't it?

  Lawyer: No your honor, I do disagree with that. I believe it encompasses Jus Sanguinus citizenship.

  Note that opinion (Justice Scalia concurring) was against the petitioner.

So Justice Scali agrees that "natural born" requires "jus soli".

The court was UNANIMOUS on this definition in Minor. You're trying to connect dots that were NEVER connected by the court. Never.

Back at you, buddy. The court in Minor was not ruling on the definition of "natural born." They were ruling on Virginia Minor's citizenship, a specific case in which she was born in the US and had two citizen parents. The court in Minor never claimed to be ruling on other situations, in fact they said they would not.