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

To: butterdezillion; txrangerette; CodeToad
In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes

So, even the FAM admits that the 1790 law DOES seem to imply such a person is eligible for the presidency.

496 posted on 10/30/2013 9:57:55 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 493 | View Replies ]


To: xzins

Not exactly. That document says that the statute gave natural born citizenship to foreign-born children of citizens but says that someone being natural born by statute doesn’t necessarily mean they are natural born for Constitutional purposes. It basically says that we need a court decision to have the answer questioned definitively.

I can handle however the court would decide; what is NOT tolerable is for the courts to deliberately leave us in limbo so they can sucker-punch us if Cruz wins the Presidency. We DO need a ruling, and we need it BEFORE the 2016 primary.


501 posted on 10/30/2013 10:06:51 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Free online faxing at http://faxzero.com/ Fax all your elected officials. Make DC listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | 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