Don’t evade. I repeat, point out where in the speech he says “birth location had no bearing on Smith being a citizen of S.C.”
laziness is sure a HUGE trait amongst cut & pasters from obot sites
St. George Tucker (from his works: Tucker's Blackstone)
by the rejection of the sovereignty of the crown of England, not only all the laws of that country by which the dependence of the colonies was secured, but the whole lex prerogativa (or Jura Coronae before mentioned) so far as respected the person of the sovereign and his prerogatives as an individual, was utterly abolished: and, that so far as respected the kingly office, and government, it was either modified, abridged, or annulled...that every rule of the common law, and every statute of England, founded on the nature of regal government, in derogation of the natural and unalienable rights of mankind; or, inconsistent with the nature and principles of democratic governments, were absolutely abrogated, repealed, and annulled, by the establishment of such a form of government in the states, respectively
Here, the answer was provided, clearly and positively, by Congress, as in its first session it enacted the immigration and naturalization Act of 1790.42 Immigration and naturalization, as Rep. James Madison then put it, was not a right but rather a privilege. In context, privilege denoted that Congress might properly limit immigration and naturalization to persons of commitment, to one who really meant to incorporate himself into our society and of a character sufficient to add to the wealth and strength of community.43 Character as thus stated included republican virtues as opposed to the servile, class-ordered mentalitiesthe sensations, impregnated with prejudices of education acquired under monarchical and aristocratical Governmentsthen associated with the old world.44
Upon showing character and commitment, by compliance with the terms of naturalization, immigrants became citizens. And so did children born to them before they were naturalized. The 1790 Act provided that upon naturalization all of their children dwelling within the United States shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. Notice, these children are not made citizens by means of jus soli: It mattered not whether these children had been born in the United States or abroad. Rather, citizenship was attuned to jus sanguines. It turned on the connection of their parents to the United States, that they had become United States citizens.
____________________________________________________________
41 As explained in a thoughtful opinion:
Whoever, then, was one of the people of either of these States when the Constitution . . . was adopted, became ipso facto a citizen-a member of the nation created by its adoption. He was one of the persons associating together to form the nation, and was, consequently, one of its original citizens. Minor v. Happensett, 88 U.S. 162, 167 (1874). 42 Act of March 26, 1790, entitled An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization, 1 Stat. 103. 43 I Annals of Cong. 1150 (Joseph Gales ed., 1834). 44 Id. at1156 (Rep. Sedgwick). Sedgwick later defined republican virtue as habits of temperate discussion, patient reasoning, and a capacity of enduring contradiction. 2 Annals at 571. Sedgwick also would exclude exploiters, those seeking short term gain without long-term commitment. Id. The whole debate was consistent with modern notions about political communities. As explained by Michael Walzer, Admission and exclusion are at the core of communal independence. They suggest the deepest meaning of self-determination. Without them, there could not be . . . historically stable, ongoing associations of men and women with some special commitment to one another and some special sense of their common life. Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality 61 (1983).
Madison: "Mr. Smith founds his claims upon his birthright; his ancestors were among the first settlers of that colony...if he were not a minor, he became bound, by his own act, ... if he was a minor, his consent was involved in the decision of that society to which he belonged by the ties of nature.