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

To: omegadawn
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.

Wong wasn't running for President, as far as I know, so there was no reason for the court to define natural born citizen. If he were, it would be obvious that he is natural born because he's native born. The Constitution makes that pretty clear. He was not a naturalized citizen; rather, a citizen from birth, a natural born citizen.

347 posted on 04/25/2010 8:47:44 AM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]


To: Kleon

The Supreme Court was making a decision on the citizenship “status” of Wong KIm Ark . Citizenship in America has always been based on the alligiance of your parents not your place of birth. example : McCain was not born in America ,but he was born of two American parents and thus a Natural born citizen. The Constitution( 14 th. amendment states that you are a citizen if you are born here AND your parents have allegiance to America). The Supreme court has always followered these :

Natural born citizen: both parents U.S. Citizens
Native born : one parent a citizen, or both parents not yet citizens but have inmmigrated to America.
No citizenship : neither parent a U.S.citizen
so you are now asking about children of illegals , they are “allowed” to claim citizenship as a policy, but have no constitutional right to do so.
If you doubt what I have said research and read the actual cases yourself.


371 posted on 04/25/2010 3:05:41 PM PDT by omegadawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | 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