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

To: allmendream
Conditions that gave that status at birth had to do with BOTH / EITHER parents or soil - there was nothing in English law demanding both.

Well then isn't it a great thing that English law was neither practiced nor put in effect here in America where we wrote and established our own law.

36 posted on 05/04/2012 9:09:52 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: philman_36

Yes, our own law. But the language they were all familiar with in the legal terms “natural born” and “naturalized” - came from England.

There is also nothing in the Constitution or U.S. law that would differentiate a U.S. citizen at birth and one who was a natural born citizen.

The term “native born” is not used in the Constitution.

Going with what the Constitution ACTUALLY says - there are currently two types of U.S. citizen as outlined by the U.S. Constitution - natural born and naturalized.


37 posted on 05/04/2012 9:15:45 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to DC to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | 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