Replies

As to the 14th Amendment I believe it's possible to make that argument, but not to the Immigration and Naturalization Act that grants Sen. Cruz's US citizenship, that is clearly positive law.

I find it a bit interesting where you chose to end Rep. Bingham's quote. I've include the following sentence that does add a bit more to the context.

This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.

Rep. Bingham was simply stating his intention of the 14th Amendment, that freed slaves in the south were natural born Citizens of the US. The 14th Amendment was created to supersede any laws that southern states may have tried to pass to restrict citizenship to freed slaves.

Here's another interesting quote from Rep Bingham -

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen -Rep. John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment, before The US House of Representatives ((Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291, March 9, 1866 )

I don't think your first quote is from Bingham. I think it was from a Senator, but his name escapes me at the moment.

I would also point out that there is more than one quote from Bingham, and the other quotes spell it out exactly that he didn't consider the children of people who owed allegiance to foreign countries as being citizens.

I got into a long argument with Obama defender "Jeff Winston" and I called him out for deliberately truncating Bingham's quote that spelled out exactly to whom Bingham was referring.

He truncated Bingham's quote because he was claiming Bingham was on his side. In fact, Bingham says twice that the children of people owing foreign allegiance are not citizens, and that the 14th amendment would not make them so.

I find it a bit interesting where you chose to end Rep. Bingham's quote.

I ended the quote where I did because the next sentence is ambiguous. Is it a list of three categories with some words and a conjunction missing: "...[1] foreigners, [2] aliens, [3 and those who] belong to..."?

Or do the commas around "aliens" mean it's an appositive, as though they were dashes or parentheses: "...foreigners (aliens) who belong to..."?

I've seen that argument thrashed out here before, with no clear conclusion, and since it wasn't relevant to my point, I didn't see any reason to bring it up again.

...every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty...

The question is what "not owing allegiance to" means. The Wong Kim Ark court said this:

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were...not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom.

and

Allegiance is nothing more than the tie or duty of obedience of a subject to the sovereign under whose protection he is, and allegiance by birth is that which arises from being born within the dominions and under the protection of a particular sovereign.

In other words, foreigners--aliens--as long as they're in this country on friendly terms, owe allegiance to this country, not any other. You may think the court decided wrong, but that's what they decided.