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

To: Faith Presses On
There's no mention there of what happens when a child who parents are either both American citizens, or one is, happens to be born on foreign soil

Well, I believe the standard was either a US Embassy, or military base...and maybe to parents in foreign service to the US.

Also no mention of what happens when parent is a natural-born American citizen and one isn't.

The type of parental US citizenship is not relevant.

And I see it says anyone born on American soil is possibly a natural-born American citizen, regardless of their parents' status.

If you read it again, I think you'll find that it appears the Justice doesn't think much of the anchor baby concept.

395 posted on 01/12/2016 6:36:12 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies ]


To: ROCKLOBSTER

>>>There’s no mention there of what happens when a child who parents are either both American citizens, or one is, happens to be born on foreign soil
Well, I believe the standard was either a US Embassy, or military base...and maybe to parents in foreign service to the US.

The SC ruling excerpt has to do with who is a citizen, not the Constitutional NBC issue directly.

And beliefs and maybes aren’t legal rulings. The situation wasn’t legally clear for service people as questions were raised about John McCain with his Panama birth to a service parent.

>>>Also no mention of what happens when parent is a natural-born American citizen and one isn’t.
The type of parental US citizenship is not relevant.

You brought up to me that Cruz’s father wasn’t an American citizen, as if, then, that was relevant to his NBC status. And there is also no mention in the ruling you excerpt from about what happens when one parent is a citizen of any type and the other isn’t, which is what I was getting at.

>>>And I see it says anyone born on American soil is possibly a natural-born American citizen, regardless of their parents’ status.
If you read it again, I think you’ll find that it appears the Justice doesn’t think much of the anchor baby concept.

I got a possible sense of that the first time, although it seems his opinion is vague on that, but what does him not thinking much of it matter, since it is indeed primarily how citizenship is being established - birth on American soil without respect to the citizenship status of either parent.


400 posted on 01/12/2016 7:08:06 PM PST by Faith Presses On ("After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | 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