Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:43 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 6,274,533 times
Reputation: 1837

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Was there a name listed to the case in which the Court made that ruling?
The 1875 case is Minor V. happersett which wasn't a citizenship case but a women's voting rights case.

The definition of NBC was defiend in US v Wong Kim Ark

Quote:
Well, sure there was and nothing to debunk that statement has appeared in all the left leaning crap in this thread. Can you come up with some new proof that the baby daddy was a US citizen?
Nothing left leaning about this, since one only has to be born here to be a citizen (otherwise there wouldn't be an uproar about "anchor babies" now would there).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:44 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,085,613 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Was there a name listed to the case in which the Court made that ruling?
The court has never "made that ruling."

Quote:
A judge's power to bind is limited to the issue that is before him; he cannot transmute dictum into decision by waving a wand and uttering the word "hold."

-Henry J. Friendly, United States v. Rubin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:44 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,061 posts, read 44,866,510 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
This is, of course, a lie. As the excellent and scholarly Congressional Research Service report explains:
That's not SCOTUS. CRS cannot overturn SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,285,332 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
when it comes to parents citizenship status having any affect on NBC it specifically states that obama is eligible.


as far as the "vetting" process goes..... it's the same one from the last 230+ years. if you don't like it petition for a constitutional amendment.
Did the 4th Estate work as hard vetting Obama as they did Palin? I hardly think so but then they had to do good work to make sure he got in the White House.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:45 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 6,274,533 times
Reputation: 1837
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Then we are stuck with the DOJ and others of his appointments since one house of the Congress approved them?
yes. and Congress can demand to impeach if they need to. Notice how no one in congress believes this tripe or have initiated any type of impeachment process based on their claims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,085,613 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
It indeed stated that Minor's case proceeded upon it. Read it.
Virginia Minor's citizenship was never even a question before the court.

Quote:
A judge's power to bind is limited to the issue that is before him; he cannot transmute dictum into decision by waving a wand and uttering the word "hold."

-Henry J. Friendly, United States v. Rubin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:46 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 6,274,533 times
Reputation: 1837
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Did the 4th Estate work as hard vetting Obama
as they did Palin?
funny how Hillary and McCain didn't believe any of the birther bs to begin with. They had the most to gain to dig up dirt like this.

Seeing as how birthers even targeted McCain, Hillary had the most standing on the issue and didn't do anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,085,613 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
Then we are stuck with the DOJ and others of his appointments since one house of the Congress approved them? I didn't know that. How do we free those who are falsely convicted of crime when it is learned that they were falsely convicted? I guess there really is a double standard determined by which party one runs for.
What the hell are you even talking about?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,085,613 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's not SCOTUS. CRS cannot overturn SCOTUS.
It doesn't overturn SCOTUS. Whatever would lead you to such a wacky idea?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2011, 12:49 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,061 posts, read 44,866,510 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Virginia Minor's citizenship was never even a question before the court.
SCOTUS sure thought so...
Quote:
"At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. The words "all children" are certainly as comprehensive, when used in this connection, as "all persons," and if females are included in the last they must be in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied. In fact the whole argument of the plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea.
Minor v. Happersett

SCOTUS could not rule on Constitutional rights until Constitutional citizenship was established.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:52 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top