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

To: Deepest End

I have read most the arguments, which are pure speculation. The Wong case seems to set the precedent for birthright citizenship. The Constitution does not provide an explicit definition of natural born, especially as it applies to the Presidency. No one knows what SCOTUS would decide since the issue has never been raised to that level legally.


74 posted on 11/28/2008 10:47:57 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: kabar

Don’t you find it odd that not one judge has sup’d the COLB?


79 posted on 11/28/2008 10:58:55 AM PST by patton (Bugger the dragon, who goes home with the princess?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

To: kabar

“I have read most the arguments, which are pure speculation. The Wong case seems to set the precedent for birthright citizenship. The Constitution does not provide an explicit definition of natural born, especially as it applies to the Presidency. No one knows what SCOTUS would decide since the issue has never been raised to that level legally.”

No, but the Constitution does differentiate. The Wong case, IMO, is not pertinent as it pertains to US citizenship. You are correct however that SCOTUS will have to decide. It is all speculation at this point (mine and yours included), the real question ... how will they decide? And furthermoe, will we have an enforceable Constitution after it is over?


80 posted on 11/28/2008 11:00:00 AM PST by Deepest End
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | 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