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

To: edge919; Mr. Know It All; RegulatorCountry
"Section 301 is naturalization law."

It is in fact an Immigration and Nationality Act. =========================================================== Sec. 301 (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; =========================================================== Sect. 301 (a) (1) merely repeats the 14th Amendment. Senators Rubio, Santorum and Governor Jindal fall within that section. All are NBCs.

Now I realize that you believe that there are three types of citizens (natural born, naturalized and 14th Amendment) but that has never been recognized by legal authorities either before or after the 14th was enacted.

In 1862 in the "Opinion of Attorney General Bates on citizenship", AG Bates writes, "We have natural born citizens, (Constitution, article 2, § 5,) not made by law or otherwise, but born. And this class is the large majority; in fact, the mass of our citizens; for all others are exceptions, specially provided for by law. As they became citizens in the natural way, by birth, so they remain citizens during their natural lives, unless, by their own voluntary act, they expatriate themselves and become citizens or subjects of another nation. ...The Constitution itself does not make the citizens, (it is, in fact,made by them.) It only intends and recognizes such of them as are natural, home-born and provides for the naturalization of such of them as were alien,foreign-born making the latter, as far as nature will allow, like the former."

This exact passage was then referenced in 1868 by George Washington Paschal in "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES DEFINED AND CAREFULLY ANNOTATED." He cited it in his discussion of the Article 2 Section 5 of the Constitution.

This exact passage from AG Bates was then cited by Alexander Porter Morse in his 1888 "Treatise on Citizenship".

In Morse's treatise, he also says, "In the law of nations, ”citizen” is a term applicable to every member of the civil society, every individual who belongs to the nation."

"This character is acquired in various ways, according to the laws of each state. In many states birth is sufficient to confer it; so that the child of an alien is a citizen from the fact of having been born within the territorial limits and the jurisdiction.2"

Footnote 2 says: ”It is so in England and in the United States [but the births must be " within the jurisdiction"'].”

This is what SoS Kobach was saying in the Kansas ballet challenge only two types of citizens - natural born and naturalized.

163 posted on 01/06/2013 2:05:34 AM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies ]


To: 4Zoltan
Footnote 2 says: ”It is so in England and in the United States [but the births must be " within the jurisdiction"'].”

Obama's birth was within the jurisdiction of England by his own admission. This alone should have warranted investigation but there was stonewalling, misdirection and ridicule to prevent it. The clock has been run down, however. Arguing it further is All but futile.

164 posted on 01/06/2013 8:11:43 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]

To: 4Zoltan
Now I realize that you believe that there are three types of citizens (natural born, naturalized and 14th Amendment) but that has never been recognized by legal authorities either before or after the 14th was enacted.

Only if you ignore a couple of major Supreme Court decisions. Let's put it this way, if the citations you provided were comprehensive, why was a birth provision added to the 14th amendment?? Why would it even be needed?? Why did the Minor decision say there were doubts about the citizenship of those persons born in the country without reference to the citizenship of the parents?? And why did the Wong Kim Ark decision say that natural-born citizens were defined outside of the Constitution but declare that the separate term of "citizenship by birth" was defined strictly by the 14th amendment?? Kobach couldn't explain this away. The Supreme Court citations outweigh an attorney general and a couple of legal reviewers.

169 posted on 01/06/2013 9:54:04 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]

To: 4Zoltan; edge919; Mr. Know It All; RegulatorCountry; butterdezillion
Friends, what we know; what we believe; what we think is in the Constitution; what we think isnt; isn't worth a hill'o'beans if a court cannot be found to agree ... or disagree ... with any one of us.

This is what the Law and The Courts are supposed to do for us. That's why we have linemen and umpires in tennis ... it's their job to tell the players ...us ... if our shots are inside the line, on it, or out.

If those whom we have selected to serve this function do not, our reaction is to fight amongst ourselves. Every country in this hemisphere has suffered through civil war and insurrection. Some have suffered through wars and revolutions on a regular basis. What makes you think we can continue to escape this fate?

I think we have lived through a successful anti-constitutional coup. Not a lot of options for undoing that if the leaders of the coup contol the vote!

182 posted on 01/11/2013 9:06:09 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (Say, what the hell happened to Reggie Love? Who's in the playroom with Barry now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | 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