Question for the birthers about citizenship

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Total BS, HD.

Minor states that the Constitution does not say who shall be a natural born citizen (and therefore then proceeds to define it). And WKA cites Minor stating that.

And none of that bears any relationship to the statement you are whining about.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

And none of that bears any relationship to the statement you are whining about.

Aw... you're just saying that because you know it proves you wrong. The court in both Minor and WKA state the Constitution does not say who shall be a natural born citizen, and ony the Minor decision proceeds to define natural born citizen: one born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Aw... you're just saying that because you know it proves you wrong.

No... it proves some hallucination you had wrong.

Because it certainly does not address anything I actually said or wrote.

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

The court in both Minor and WKA state the Constitution does not say who shall be a natural born citizen,...

Insert large non-controversial "Duh!" here."

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

...and ony the Minor decision proceeds to define natural born citizen: one born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents.

And of course, this is lie as proven by the fact that of the two decisions, only Wong Kim Ark has ever actually been cited as precedent for the definition of natural born citizen.