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

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
Yet a court can only answer the question put before it.

Was it asked "Is Wong Kim Ark a natural born citizen"?

No

Did it affirm "Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen"?

No.

-----

The continued assertion is that the court proclaimed him a natural-born citizen is false.

All of the 'rationale' reasoning' and 'examples' in the world are moot because none of them can change the words contained the final determination.

Wong Kim Ark was a 'citizen of the United States'.

267 posted on 03/27/2013 3:51:04 PM PDT by MamaTexan (Please do not mistake my devotion to fairness as permission to be used as a doormat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies ]


To: MamaTexan
The continued assertion is that the court proclaimed him a natural-born citizen is false.
All of the 'rationale' reasoning' and 'examples' in the world are moot because none of them can change the words contained the final determination.
Wong Kim Ark was a 'citizen of the United States'.

True, they didn't "proclaim" him a natural-born citizen. That doesn't mean he wasn't one, any more than my not proclaiming my Texan example to be from Houston doesn't mean she isn't. The fact remains that in order to find he was a citizen, they examined the meaning of "natural-born citizen" and decided he was one--as the dissenters acknowledged.

276 posted on 03/27/2013 4:31:15 PM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | 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