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

To: lbryce
that has been interpreted to provide that, if you are born in the United States, you are a citizen no matter what

No it hasn't. Wong Kim Ark dealt with the children of legal aliens.

The subject of illegal aliens has never come up.

Intentionally. Because their supporters realize what would happen.

42 posted on 08/03/2010 10:41:48 AM PDT by Regulator (Watch Out!! The Americans are On the March!! America Forever, Mexico Never!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Regulator
i>"Wong Kim Ark dealt with the children of legal aliens."

That's not right either. The majority opinion in Ark made no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants - which was a concept that had already been established with the enactment of the Page Act of 1875, some 14 years before Ark was heard and decided.

The Ark opinion, both the majority and dissenting opinion, could have drawn a distinction between the two classifications of immigrants, but didn't. The only exceptions the major laid out was (1) children born to foreign diplomats and (2) children born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory.

The central legal argument Gray asserts stipulates these facts...

"The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative."

While that's not inclusive of illegals, it's certainly not exclusionary either. A future court is either going to narrow or affirm the understanding in Ark, but whatever happens, it will be their call, not Congress.

47 posted on 08/03/2010 12:05:54 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: Regulator
No it hasn't. Wong Kim Ark dealt with the children of legal aliens.

True, the case was about aliens who had entered the country legally. The USSC has never directly ruled on illegal immigrants per se although in Elk v. Wilkins the plaintiff John Elk was born in the US on a reservation but as a member of an Indian nation was not considered to be an automatic citizen at the time. So that may be considered an illegal immigrant case.

That's why I don't understand how anyone in Congress today cannot get the fact that their own legislating in the Indian Citizenship Act, which came years after Ark affirmed their authority to determine whether whole classes of illegal aliens would qualify to be an automatic citizen or not. Or it could be most likely they do and prefer to keep it political.

48 posted on 08/03/2010 3:09:38 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | 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