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

To: John Valentine
We've been over this before.

The Elk vs. Wilkins decision is the "definitive" word regarding the 14th Amendment. This is because they took into account the intentions of the Framers.

In Elk, the SC specifically stated that birthright citizenship only applied to those that fell completely within the jurisdiction of the United States and owing it direct and immeadiate allegiance.

In Wong, they compltely ignored the ruling set down the Elk decision.

Deplorable.

90 posted on 12/04/2008 3:24:11 AM PST by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: Cyropaedia

And you Sir, are on the money.

It’s like I said, and I think you’ll agree that it’s far worse when the yo-yos are judges.

The Ark case was a tough one, but even so, it should have been decided in accordance with the law, even if the result would have worked a severe hardship, even an unfair one, on Mr. Wong. That’s the role of the courts.

It was Congress’ role, not the Court’s, to find a fair resolution for Mr. Wong, if they dared, which they did not.


95 posted on 12/04/2008 3:40:28 AM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | 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