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

To: MamaTexan

If there is no authority to define a constitutional term, how can anyone be excluded from the category or included in it when there is a question? There have been cases and contraversies over who qualifies as a natural born citizen.

Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 2: “The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;—to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;—to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;—to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;—to controversies between two or more states;—between a state and citizens of another state;—between citizens of different states;—between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.”


74 posted on 04/01/2015 7:12:35 PM PDT by Nero Germanicus (PALIN/CRUZ: 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Nero Germanicus
If there is no authority to define a constitutional term, how can anyone be excluded from the category or included in it when there is a question? There have been cases and controversies over who qualifies as a natural born citizen.

True, but once the judicial mess known as Wong Kim Ark hit the trail, nothing concerning citizenship was 'Constitutional' anymore.

Wong Kim was declared naturalized at birth by a judge who used a grandfather clause intended to give citizenship to a LIMITED class of people and perverting what Blackstone called a 'local allegiance'- (a temporary allegiance owed by aliens to their place of residence ONLY) - into a native born, but not NATURAL born citizen....and created the country's first anchor baby.

From Wong Kim Ark quoting Marshall:
The constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the courts of the United States, precisely under the same circumstances under which a native might sue.

To the rest of the quote by Marshall;

He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen, except so far as the constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none. There is, then, no resemblance between the act incorporating the Bank, and the general naturalization law. Osborn v. Bank of the United States

>>>except so far as the constitution makes the distinction<<<

The Constitution makes only one between Natural born and naturalized citizens - only a natural born can be President.

75 posted on 04/01/2015 7:34:01 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | 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