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.
Then explain Spiro Agnew. Mother was born in the US, father an immigrant. Didn't naturalize till after Agnew was born.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent
Again this clause of the 14th amendment is interpreted in Wong Kim Ark to allow people born in the US, who are the children of foreign parents birthright citizenship. In Wong Kim Ark both the parents were Qing subjects and he still was deemed to be a citizen.
Neither one of these deemed these individuals NATURAL BORN..
Neither one of these deemed these individuals NATURAL BORN..
Try to stay focused.
Yes they did. The reason being was the Chinese exclusion act of 1882. At the time it was near impossible to become a naturalized citizen if you were Chinese so the only way Wong Kim Ark could get citizenship was for him to be natural born.
Boy. every post yhou make shows exactly how much a failure you're at basic English.
Last I looked whether your in the California, Alaska or Hawaii, you're on US Soil.
Us soil = United Sates.
An illegal immigrant who arrived in Texas can still be deported, if he traveled to California and got caught.
Quote:
Who the hell said they arent subject to our jurisdiction.. The question is ARE THEY A CITIZEN..
Foreign Sovereigns, Foreign Diplomats/Ambassadors and their Families and prisoners of war
Quote:
NO they arent..
Not according to the 200 years of case history.
Quote:
Are you still researching what happens if your club says both parents have to be a member? I'm still waiting for your reply
Has nothing to do with what is being explained to you. You are hung up on "plurals" of words, showing your ignorance on grammar and English, and I simplified it for you using a modern day example.
Your failure to see this is NOT our problem.
Says the guy who doesn't know the difference between two completely different Birther arguments.
Says the guy who cant comprehend that I'm not a birther.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
What about Spiro Agnew. Mother was a US citizen, father was an immigrant, who naturalized after Spiro was born in US soil.
You do know who Spiro Agnew is right?
The only one not focused is you. Jumping around from claim to claim without knowing exactly what you are claiming and the history behind such claims.
No they arent.. There is a difference between citizen, and natural born
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
Boy. every post yhou make shows exactly how much a failure you're at basic English.
Last I looked whether your in the California, Alaska or Hawaii, you're on US Soil.
Us soil = United Sates.
An illegal immigrant who arrived in Texas can still be deported, if he traveled to California and got caught.
Foreign Sovereigns, Foreign Diplomats/Ambassadors and their Families and prisoners of war
Not according to the 200 years of case history.
Has nothing to do with what is being explained to you. You are hung up on "plurals" of words, showing your ignorance on grammar and English, and I simplified it for you using a modern day example.
Your failure to see this is NOT our problem.
If it doesnt have to do with it, then why do you keep posting your country club as an example? You have no discredited your own example.. Priceless
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent
Yes they did. The reason being was the Chinese exclusion act of 1882. At the time it was near impossible to become a naturalized citizen if you were Chinese so the only way Wong Kim Ark could get citizenship was for him to be natural born.
Natural born, native born, and nationalized are 3 different classificaitions. Despite historical dude's claim that the total is 2.
2. In that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United states, as much so before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution as since.
Was there a name listed to the case in which the Court made that ruling? 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?
Understanding how to read a case is not "left leaning crap."
This issue WAS well settled in the law until some crackpot right wing loonies exhumed it because they can't stomach a black man with an Arab name being President.
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.
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.
