NBS and NBC aren't equivalent. Regardless, the aliens, under common law, had to declare an oath of allegiance to the crown. This gets overlooked.
“Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts.”
Minor resolves the doubt by talking about early naturalization acts in the United States that didn't declare the children of aliens to be citizens until the father naturalized. There was no assumption of being a citizen at birth for children of aliens. Even in the colonies prior to the Constitution, it was recognized that you could born here of a denizen and be a denizen, not a natural born subject. Even the Civil Rights Act of 1866 shows that clearly, prior to the 14th amendment, being born here of an alien would not make one a citizen at birth. " ... all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States."
And in the dissent, WKA specifically pointed out that it made WKA eligible to run for President.
No he doesn't. It says, "Tested by this rule, Wong in Ark never became and is not a citizen of the United States ..." This allows that the WKA decision would have only made WKA eligible for Congress
“NBS and NBC aren’t equivalent. “
In WKA, the court disagreed with you. They use them as equivalents. That is why they used NBS to reveal the original intent of NBC...
Anyone who disagrees can read the first few pages here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
It is VERY clear that the court equates the two.
“There was no assumption of being a citizen at birth for children of aliens.”
Again, the court disagreed with you.
“It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
In the early case of The Charming Betsy, (1804) it appears to have been assumed by this court that all persons born in the United States were citizens of the United States, Chief Justice Marshall saying:
Whether a person born within the United States, or becoming a citizen according to the established laws of the country, can divest himself absolutely of [p659] that character otherwise than in such manner as may be prescribed by law is a question which it is not necessary at present to decide.”
“No he doesn’t.”
“Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the Constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that “natural-born citizen” applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances, and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay or other race, were eligible to the Presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZD.html
F me!
Where did this dumb frag come from?
Thanks for your post. This guy is a paid paean of Barry.