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

To: MHGinTN
They did, but the Supreme Court said:
and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens. [n8] These provisions thus enacted have, in substance, been retained in all the naturalization laws adopted since. In 1855, however, the last provision was somewhat extended, and all persons theretofore born or thereafter to be born out of the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were, or should be at the time of their birth, citizens of the United States, were declared to be citizens also.

There's an emphasis on the fathers being citizens at the time of birth in order for the child to be a citizen at birth and this is true home and abroad. It leaves out the present WH occupant and several possible contenders.

41 posted on 03/26/2013 8:38:08 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: edge919

Oh my, whatever will we do with you. Not drinking your serving of obamanoid koolaid?


47 posted on 03/26/2013 8:44:01 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | 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