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

To: edge919
Clearly, Waite is voicing a disagreement among the authorities of the day, and the characteristics that they are using to partition the citizenry into different grades of citizenship. Huh?

I think that if there is a question, and obviously there is, NBC should be defined unambiguously. NOW!

692 posted on 02/14/2012 4:33:54 PM PST by GregoryFul (We all live in an Idiocracy, an Idiocracy, an Idiocracy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies ]


To: GregoryFul
Clearly, Waite is voicing a disagreement among the authorities of the day, and the characteristics that they are using to partition the citizenry into different grades of citizenship.

It's not just Waite. He was joined by all of the Supreme Court justices in his decision. Second, it's not necessarily that he's disagreeing with authorities, because some of them may have been correct, such as those referring to their own state laws. What Waite is doing is explaining exactly what the nomenclature of the founders was. The lengths "some authorites" go to is not strong enough to make anyone a citizen without resolving doubts. As proposed by Waite, the only way to solve those doubts is to a) go by the relevant statutory laws; b) apply the 14th amendment to those it would apply to; or c) determine whether the parents were citizens or not. If the criteria of c is met, then the child was a natural-born citizen, but not so for a and b. How much clearer does that definition have to be??

693 posted on 02/14/2012 8:11:52 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 692 | 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