To: W. W. SMITH
B: Only birthers believe that. Ankeny reflects the accepted view of NBC in the American legal system.
D: True. Also irreverent. If he was born in America then he is NBC.
E: There is no case law that supports your theory.
To: Harlan1196; W. W. SMITH
@
James Madison, House of Representatives 22 May 1789I think there is a distinction which will invalidate his doctrine in this particular, a distinction between that primary allegiance which we owe to that particular society of which we are members, and the secondary allegiance we owe to the sovereign established by that society. This distinction will be illustrated by the doctrine established by the laws of Great Britain, which were the laws of this country before the revolution. The sovereign cannot make a citizen by any act of his own; he can confer denizenship, but this does not make a man either a citizen or subject. In order to make a citizen or subject, it is established, that allegiance shall first be due to the whole nation; it is necessary that a national act should pass to admit an individual member. In order to become a member of the British empire, where birth has now endowed the person with that privilege, he must be naturalized by an act of parliament.
And just a bit further down...
What was the allegiance as a citizen of South-Carolina, he owed to the King of Great Britain? He owed his allegiance to him as a King of that society to which, as a society he owed his primary allegiance. When that society separated from Great Britain, he was bound by that act and his allegiance transferred to that society, or the sovereign which that society should set up, because it was through his membership of the society of South-Carolina, that he owed allegiance to Great Britain.
Let me know if you need help figuring this part out...
...it is established, that allegiance shall first be due to the whole nation...
50 posted on
02/23/2012 7:18:50 PM PST by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Harlan1196
Ankeny reflects the accepted view of NBC in the American legal system.
Does a SCOTUS case have greater precedence over a State appeal case?
51 posted on
02/23/2012 7:22:42 PM PST by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Harlan1196
E: There is no case law that supports your theory.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Try reading the constitution. good lord but the dullard fringe is out tonight!
74 posted on
02/23/2012 9:03:48 PM PST by
W. W. SMITH
(Obama is Romney lite)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson