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

To: SatinDoll; edge919; Lmo56

I realize I’m butting in (perhaps naively) on a contentious exchange, but I *think* that Lmo56 is on the same page, here. He/She appears to be saying that “Obama” supporters point to WKA as conferring NBC on “Obama” but that it does nothing of the kind.
Just sayin’. Maybe I read the commentary wrong.


45 posted on 11/17/2011 12:56:55 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (Larry Sinclair: The Original "Stimulus Package")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Flotsam_Jetsome

Earlier in this thread, Lmo56 said, “HOWEVER, that DOES NOT settle the “natural-born citizen” [NBC] question since it HAS NEVER been EXACTLY defined in the Constitution [or its amendments], nor by SCOTUS ruling.” We have at least TWO landmark SCOTUS rulings that did define natural-born citizen. This is why I’m addressing the confusion about dicta and holding. WKA arrived at a conclusion that Ark was a citizen under the 14th amendment because he could NOT declare him to be a natural-born citizen under the definition that was cited from the Minor decision. This is an example of stare decisis, not dicta. Justice Gray looked at previous Supreme Court decisions and how each addressed the subject clause of the 14th amendment. Gray satisfied the subject clause by including a permanent residence and domicil requirement that was formed by the lengthy review of common law. Gray made a few errors, but along the way, he clearly defined NBC and upheld a decision that was unanimous in defining the term and in rejecting the 14th amendment as applying to NBCs.


52 posted on 11/17/2011 6:45:40 AM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome
I realize I’m butting in (perhaps naively) on a contentious exchange, but I *think* that Lmo56 is on the same page, here. He/She appears to be saying that “Obama” supporters point to WKA as conferring NBC on “Obama” but that it does nothing of the kind.

I agree. I originally started to chastise him as well, but upon reading further into his commentary I realized he was saying that the Decision in Wong Kim Ark did NOT confer NBC status on Mr. Wong. He is on the same page as we.

53 posted on 11/17/2011 6:48:05 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Obama is an "unnatural born citizen.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome

Lmo56 contends that Wong Kim Ark, who was a citizen by the 14th Amendment BUT was never a natural born citizen, was indeed NBC because of the 14th Amendment.

He/she is a liar. That claim is patently false.

The Wong Kim Ark case NEVER said any such thing. WKA had no more eligibility to run for president than any anchor baby born here in the USA today!

A person born in the USA of citizen parents is a NBC per M v. H; that is a holding, setting precedent, per the US Supreme Court.

I can’t even begin to explain how that pisses off Obama’s supporters.


56 posted on 11/17/2011 8:24:16 AM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | 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