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

To: CDR Kerchner
Article briefly mentions and dismisses the 14th Amendment:

(from the article)The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, is often incorrectly cited as defining “natural born Citizen,” but the term appears nowhere in its text. Rather, it “granted citizenship and equal civil and legal rights to African Americans and slaves who had been emancipated after the American Civil War, including them under the umbrella phrase ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States,’” Encyclopedia Britannica explains.

Proponents of the definition requiring parental U.S. citizenship in addition to birth in the United States cite Rep. John Bingham, considered the main author of the 14th Amendment, and Section 212 of Emmerich de Vattel’s “The Law of Nations,” which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

The LLI https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/natural_born_citizen says:

A natural born citizen refers to someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth, and did not need to go through a naturalization proceeding later in life. Under the 14th Amendment's Naturalization Clause and the Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US. 649, anyone born on U.S. soil and subject to its jurisdiction is a natural born citizen, regardless of parental citizenship. This type of citizenship is referred to as birthright citizenship. One can be a citizen while not being a natural born citizen if, for example, that person gained citizenship through the process of naturalization.

The case they cite United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/169/649/ is about a Chinese man born in the US to two non-citizens and whether he was a citizen or not. He was obviously not a presidential candidate, The case basically declares that every citizen is either naturalized or natural-born but immediately makes exceptions for children born to diplomats. This case also notes the 1790 law that made McCain a natural-born citizen even though he was born overseas.

The 1898 case does address the qualifications for the presidency.

75 posted on 07/27/2024 4:15:38 AM PDT by palmer (Democracy Dies Six Ways from Sunday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: palmer

Cornell. Yeah; I care what these commies think. Not.


76 posted on 07/27/2024 4:20:56 AM PDT by MayflowerMadam (It's not as if Biden has the nuclear codes or anything. 😳)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

To: palmer
Under the 14th Amendment's Naturalization Clause and the Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US. 649, anyone born on U.S. soil and subject to its jurisdiction is a natural born citizen, regardless of parental citizenship.

The people that write this crap don't even read what they themselves write.

They plainly state "naturalization clause" and then claim this is "natural born." No, "naturalization" is *NOT* "natural born."

Only natural born is natural born.

Also, "Wong Kim Ark" doesn't *SAY* "natural born." It says "citizen."

They are either inadvertently conflating the meaning of the one thing to be the same thing as the other, or they are just lying.

Wong Kim Ark doesn't say "natural born."

14th amendment doesn't say "natural born."

Neither thing says "natural born" so where do they keep getting those words out of documents that say no such thing?

125 posted on 07/27/2024 11:34:51 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | 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