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

To: spookie

The supreme court has already defined Natural born as of two U.S. citizens in 1874

please cite the case. I’n not doubting you, I want the info for ammunition.


19 posted on 05/19/2012 3:09:26 PM PDT by navyblue (<u>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: navyblue
"please cite the case."

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875):

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. 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. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.

Article II SuperPac

22 posted on 05/19/2012 7:05:47 PM PDT by Godebert (NO PERSON EXCEPT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | 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