Replies

You are NOT being sincere!!! Here is what you said:

" NBC: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."

Citizenship by birth: "But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution."
==========

By putting the "But" where you did you made it read the way you wanted, like NBC was one thing and "citizenship by birth" was another. BUT, here is the actual COMPLETE quotation:

As stated by the Court in the historic decision United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702,

Citizenship by naturalization can only be acquired by naturalization under the authority and in the forms of law. But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution.

Sooo, now it is clear that the second part, citizenship by birth is being contrast with NATURALIZATION, not with NATURAL BORN CITIZEN like you tried to get away with!!!

Because I googled your words and it sent me here which made it clear what you were trying to do:

Perez v. Brownell

I guess I am going to have to google it every time you quote something.

Sorry, squeeks, BUT you're NOT being sincere. You need to go to the ORIGINAL SOURCE, which is Wong Kim Ark (which is noted in my previous post), and then go back to the beginning of the cited paragraph and not just one sentence prior:

The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in the declaration that

all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,
contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization. Citizenship by naturalization can only be acquired by naturalization under the authority and in the forms of law. But citizenship by birth is established by the mere fact of birth under the circumstances defined in the Constitution.

Do you UNDERSTAND what this is saying?? This is talking ONLY about the 14th amendment, which is part of the Constitution. Remember: the court already said in this same decision that the Constitution does NOT say who shall be NBCs. This paragraph says the Constitution via the 14th amendment contemplates two SOURCES of citizenship. One is naturalization, but this type of citizenship is not defined nor controlled by the 14th amendment but by Congress, while the source of "citizenship by birth" is defined ONLY by the 14th amendment and not by Congress. IOW, this makes an even STRONGER distinction between NBC and citizenship by birth, than I originally explained. Thanks for stabbing your own argument in the foot.