The holding was that Elg was natural born. Nowhere in that holding did it exclude those born on American soil as not natural born. Where is your supreme court case finding that those born on American soil with only one (or no) citizen parents were not natural born citizens? Where is your official definition by the courts that “natural born” and “native born” and “citizen at birth” are not synonyms?
Several cases have been posting saying that those born on American soil are natural born, and no Supreme Court case that says otherwise.
Several cases have been posting saying that those born on American soil are natural born, and no Supreme Court case that says otherwise.
And no SCOTUS case have ever said they are natural born by virtue of being born on the soil. In fact, in Minor v. Happersett said that there are doubts about them. And which cases? Those BS illegal alien deportation case(s) presided by some Carter activist judge who cited some illegal alien lawyer without backing up the statement with anything of substance that had nothing to do with NBC clause in the US Constitution. That was total silly dicta, or was it that ignorant Indiana state case that has been taken apart, which they really don't say anything but to fool people? That case was laughable. Or any of the other lower court cases that used obiter dictum of British law about NBS which amounts to nothing? However, we do have a Supreme Court case that unequivocally states who is a natural born citizen in Perkins v.Elg.
Where is your official definition by the courts that “natural born” and “native born” and “citizen at birth” are not synonyms?
I've answer this question about a billion times. If you have been following this for three years, you should have figured out that the courts have differentiated between native v natural born because of the 14th Amendment and the WKA 1898 case. Before that time, "native" and "natural" had the same meaning.
Another poster has repeatedly posted many court cases that show the courts hold that born on American soil makes one natural born. You ignore those.
Lets talk about the ignorance we get from OBots.
They have a complete propensity to ignore the meaning and intent behind the authors for those laws. Instead, they cling to activist judges who substitute their opinions for the meaning and intent behind laws.
As in the intent and meaning behind the natural citizen clause, which is natural law, and not some foreign positive law as is the 'natural born subject' law of England.
You only have to go so far to see the meaning and intent behind the natural born citizen clause when Alexander Hamilton changed the draft of the US Constitution in July of 1787 from "Born a Citizen" to "Natural Born Citizen" after John Jay sent his letter to George Washington that the President needs to have a "strong check" on foreign influences. That means no other allegiance to another power from the day any would be president was born.
This is a big example of a divergence seen first hand from British common law of being born on the soil, or NBS, to Natural Law written in the US Constitution.