While that's an interesting interpretation, no court in the United States is ever going agree with you. They will echo the Ankeny v Gov of Indiana case, where the court said, "persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born citizens, for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
“...persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born citizens...”
Careful now - that line of reasoning would suggest that a Mexican couple could illegally cross our border into TX and plop out a baby who could later grow up to be President.
Do you really want to suggest that?
<>While that’s an interesting interpretation, no court in the United States is ever going agree with you.<>
These courts did:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/
NO that court was wrong. Words matter
“They will echo the Ankeny v Gov of Indiana case, where the court said, “persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born citizens, for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
look up the difference between NATIVE BORN and NATURAL BORN. Big difference.Our constitution states Natural Born as requirement to being POTUS
Wrong:
"THE VENUS, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J. concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of Natural Born Citizen)
SHANKS V. DUPONT, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel)
MINOR V. HAPPERSETT, 88 U.S.162,167-168 ( 1875) (same definition without citing Vattel)
EX PARTE REYNOLDS, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel)
UNITED STATES V WARD, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D. Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel.)"
Isn't that the same case the cited the POTUS requirements as coming from AII,Section 1, Clause 4 (four) instead of clause 5?
One already has in 1875. The Surpeme Court as a matter of fact:
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.
Note the second group, "born within the jurisdiction without referance to the citizenship of their parents" are refered to as "citizens", not as natural born citizens, as are those born in the jurisdictoin of parents who are citizens themselves.
“While that’s an interesting interpretation, no court in the United States is ever going agree with you.”
.
The US Supreme Court has agreed with that point four times.
.
Just a few facts to consider: The Supreme Court has already clearly defined the difference between Native born and Natural born.example(Wong Kim Ark and the Elg vs US) . In the Ark case a child was born to parents who has legally immigrated to the U.S. but were not yet U.S. citizens(naturalized). Ark was declared a NATIVE born Naturalized citizen. In the Elg case a child was born to parents who were both Naturalized citizens but later returned home to Sweden. The child was declared a Natural Born citizen. The Ankeny case reference these cases but choose to ignor the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Ankeny case was in a district court not in a FEDERAL court and is not binding on federal law. Local courts DO NOT overrule the Supreme Court. Why are obama supporters referencing a lower court ruling but are ignoring Supreme Court cases that prove just the opposite. The answer is simple , if this ever gets to the U.S. Supreme court, obama would NOT be declared a Natural Born citizen. If Ankeny is appealed it will be overturned as it has no authority to override Federal law and the U.S. Constitution