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

To: Carry_Okie

How can a child who did not sneak in be considered ‘under the jurisdiction of their homeland’, a country they have never set foot in?


34 posted on 04/24/2013 5:34:53 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas is a state of mind - Steinbeck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: JCBreckenridge
How can a child who did not sneak in be considered ‘under the jurisdiction of their homeland’, a country they have never set foot in?

The law doesn't say "under" it says "subject," which, given that I posted a link to an 1856 law dictionary above AND that definition is in the article you clearly didn't read, renders your "question" baiting and misdirection on a foundation of ignorance.

39 posted on 04/24/2013 5:48:23 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (An economy is not a zero-sum game, but politics usually is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]

To: JCBreckenridge
How can a child who did not sneak in be considered ‘under the jurisdiction of their homeland’, a country they have never set foot in?

Nationality law. For example, the British Nationality Act of 1948 establishes worldwide jurisdiction in the matter of British nationality. Obama was born under the U.K.'s nationality jurisdiction.

Much like the U.S. has established worldwide jurisdiction over its citizens in the matter of being required to pay federal taxes on their income regardless of source.

73 posted on 04/25/2013 7:03:51 AM PDT by Rides3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | 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