[Golden Eagle]

Thanks for that link, very informative, however I’m afraid that the documentation of the debates over the 14th Amendment isn’t legally binding. Combined with all the other circumstantial evidence it should be, but with the judges currently in this country it’s probably not going to fly, unfortunately. We need the current House to bring it up for a vote, and try to use it as a campaign issue, to prevent these types of issues in the future, since everyone should (although they won’t of course) be willing to accept that.

[rxsid]

Oh, of course it isn't "legally" binding...fact of the matter is, the reason we're in the situation is precisely because SCOTUS (prior to 2008) has never had to make a determination as to the definition as it relates to AII,S1,C5 specifically. And, since 2008, they've been evading the issue.

It has, however, been defined...as mentioned, by some very noteworthy authorities...especially those who actually discussed the nature of citizenship during the debates on the drafting of the 14th.