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.
If you are an illegal alien your child may well be going home with you any time now. The anchor babies date back to 1868 when someone wanted to make sure that nobody tried to keep black babies born to former slaves be kept from being citizens, There is a good chance that illegals will be sent home and have to take their "anchor babies" with them soon.
Very true, and that was the ONLY reason it was enacted. It should now be removed but both parties are desparate to hold on to the hispanic vote.
I saw a guy wearing a tee-shirt, on it was printed:
"Don't call me Hispanic, I am Mexican!" I might have respected him if it stated I am American ...
Warren Freedman, Presidential Timber: Foreign Born Children of American Parents, 35 Cornell L. Q. 1949-1950.
Van Dyne, Citizenship of the United States, (1904)
Jill Pryor, The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty, 97 Yale L.J. 881 (1988).
Quote:
She wrote: It is well settled that “native-born” citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born.
Jonathan Drimmer, The Nephews of Uncle Sam: The history, evolution, and application of birthright citizenship in the United States, 9 Georgetown Imm. L. J. 667 (1993)
James Kettner, Development of American Citizenship 1608-1870 (1978)
Ainslie v. Martin, 9 Mass. 454 (1813)
Lynch v. Clarke, 1 Sand. Ch. at 645
Leti Volpp, “Obnoxious to their very nature”: Asian Americans and Constitutional Citizenship, 8 Asian L. J. 71 (2001)
Charles Gordon, Who can be President of the United STates: The Unresolved Enigma, 28 Md. L. Rev. 1 (1968)
Bernadette Meyler, The Gestation of Birthright Citizenship, 1868-1898 States’ Rights, the Law of nations and mutual Consent, 15 Georgetown Imm. L. J. 519 (2000).
Henry Ide, Citizenship by Birth – Another View, 30 Am. L. Rev. 241 (1894).
Earl Maltz, Citizenship and the Constitution: A History and Critique of the Supreme Court’s Alienage Jurisprudence, 28 Ariz. St. L.J. 1135 (1996)
Prentiss Webster, A Treatise on the Law of Citizenship, 1891.
Tucker, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA (1803). (location of birth).
Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829). (location of birth, even if parent is non-citizen).
Kent, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW (1826-30). (location of birth).
Story, COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION (1833).
Hurd, THE LAW OF FREEDOM AND BONDAGE IN THE UNITED STATES (1858-1862). (location of birth).
Paschal, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES DEFINED AND CAREFULLY ANNOTATED (1868)
L. Freedman, An Idea Whose Time Has Come–The Curious History, Uncertain Effect, and Need for Amendment of the “Natural Born Citizen” Requirement for the Presidency, 52 St. Louis U. L.J. 137, 143 (2007) (location of birth).
Duggin & Mary Beth Collins, ‘Natural Born’ in the USA: The Striking Unfairness and Dangerous Ambiguity of the Constitution’s Presidential Qualifications Clause and Why We Need to Fix It, 85 B.U. L. Rev. 53, 90-91 (2005). (location of birth).
Lohman, Presidential Eligibility: The Meaning of the Natural-Born Citizen Clause, 36 Gonz. L. Rev. 349, 359-63 (2000-01). (location of birth; discusses Wong Kim Ark’s rejection of citizenship by parentage).
Smith, CIVIC IDEALS: CONFLICTING VISIONS OF CITIZENSHIP IN U.S. HISTORY (1999). (location of birth; expressly rejects citizenship by parentage was accepted by Founding Fathers).
Pryor, The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty, 97 Yale L.J. 881(1988). (location of birth).
Medina, The Presidential Qualification Clause in this Bicentennial Year: The Need to Eliminate the Natural Born Citizen Requirement, 12 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 253, 258-261 (1987). (location of birth).
McElwee, unpublished article reprinted in 113 Cong. Rec. 15,875 at 15,876 (1967).(location of birth).
James C. Ho, Defining “American”: Birthright Citizenship and the Original Understanding of the 14th Amendment, 9:4 The Green Bag, 366 (2006).
John W. Dean, A Fresh, Powerful Case for Amending the U.S. Constitution to Remove the “Natural Born” Qualification For the Presidency, FindLaw (2005).
Malinda L.Seymore, The Presidency and the Meaning of Citizenship, 2005 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 917, at 934-94 (2005).
John W. Dean, The Pernicious “Natural Born” Clause of the Constitution: Why Immigrants Like Governors Schwarzenegger and Granholm Ought to be Able to Become Presidents, FindLaw (2004).
John Yinger, No Americans Should Be Second-Class Citizens: Prepared Statement by John Yinger (Professor of Economics and Public Administration, Center for Policy Research, The Maxwell School, Syracuse University) Before the House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, July 24, 2000.
“Christopher L. Eisgruber, Birthright Citizenship and the Constitution, 72 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 54, at 177 (1997)] (acknowledging that everyone born in the United States receives citizenship automatically).” [as cited in Duggin & Collins, at 90-91 and n.197] .
“Peter H. Schuck, The Re-evaluation of American Citizenship, 12 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 1, 4 (1997) (confirming that citizenship is extended to essentially all individuals born on United States soil).” .
“Robert J. Shulman, Children of a Lesser God: Should the Fourteenth Amendment be Altered or Repealed to Deny Automatic Citizenship Rights and Privileges to American Born Children of Illegal Aliens?, 22 Pepp. L. Rev. 669, 674 (1995)
“Note, The Birthright Citizenship Amendment: A Threat to Equality, 107 Harv. L. Rev. 1026, 1026 (1994) (stating that Fourteenth Amendment provides that all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens).”
“David S. Schwartz, The Amorality of Consent, 74 Cal. L. Rev. 2143 (1986).
Do you have links, or is this just a cut-and-paste from somewhere?
Do you have links, or is this just a cut-and-paste from somewhere?
you could go to your local library and look up each of those articles. They are published you know in these things called books. I know that you teenagers are confused by such objects seeing that everything you read is on the internet, but us old folks relied on reading ACTUAL books, and magazines. Some of which have never been transcribed or found on the net.
but to give you help since you are ignorant of what Libraries are, google has some excerpts from books posted online (however you still need to goto a book store or library to read the entire book) http://books.google.com/
Just like any lazy birther, will not lift a finger to do an inch of their own research.
you could go to your local library and look up each of those articles. They are published you know in these things called books. I know that you teenagers are confused by such objects seeing that everything you read is on the internet, but us old folks relied on reading ACTUAL books, and magazines. Some of which have never been transcribed or found on the net.
but to give you help since you are ignorant of what Libraries are, google has some excerpts from books posted online (however you still need to goto a book store or library to read the entire book) Google Books
Just like any lazy birther, will not lift a finger to do an inch of their own research.
you could go to your local library and look up each of those articles. They are published you know in these things called books. I know that you teenagers are confused by such objects seeing that everything you read is on the internet, but us old folks relied on reading ACTUAL books, and magazines. Some of which have never been transcribed or found on the net.
but to give you help since you are ignorant of what Libraries are, google has some excerpts from books posted online (however you still need to goto a book store or library to read the entire book) Google Books
Just like any lazy birther, will not lift a finger to do an inch of their own research.
Yeah we are all lazy ... I provided dozens of links, and you hardly any. Just post the link.
You sir are repulsive!! A person asks for the link, which if it existed you could surely post it. Typical lefty lib tactic, lay down a smoke screen, spew lies, then run for cover like the cowards you all are.
BTW, calling people ignorant is against the rules. You lyer!!! What makes you think we are all teenagers? I am sure I am many years your senior.
So stop making things up, post the links, then put down the bong and the Washington compost.
Show us the long form cert. !!! Find that link youngster.
Also to add, not only do we have Court Cases that prove that natural born = born on US Soil; that native born is used interchangeably with natural born and that by US LAW and the Constitution there are only two classes of US Citizen, or how a person can obtain US Citizenship (born here or by being naturalized) we also have tons of legal reviews, reports done by constitutional history scholars:
What do birthers have?
1) a dentist - lawyer - realator - California Secretary of State candidate, who has been sanctioned by the court for filing frivious lawsuits
2) Mario Apuzo who continuously (like red here) misrepresent the findings of several court decisions concerning citizenship status
3) Pastor Manning - a self hating black man, who thinks that his fake grand juries have any legal weight.
4) Leo Donofrio - who writes nothing but lies and posts those articles to non credible websites
5) Walter Fitzpatrick, Darren Huff - "Patriots" who think that they can take the law into their own hands by initiating a citizen's arrests on government officials (thereby getting arrested themselves)
6) Lt. Lakin - the army surgeon who is putting his entire military career behind the lies of birthers
7) Phil Berg - who can be basically considered the "father" of birtherstan claims (with the first case against Obama) - you can pretty much TRACE every single birther claim to Phil Berg's first case.
8) Andy Martin - who has filed 3 lawsuits in Hawaii, and had to be schooled by a Reporter there, about how one becomes a citizen
But do you know what is wrong with the Birther list? NOT ONE of them are Constitutional experts.
You don't need to be constitutional expert to understand that fact that you have to be born here or if not born here, the parents must meet the eligibility requirements. So when is national Kenyan day? Will Bama be swapping that for presidents day?
You include just this ... Jill Pryor, The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty, 97 Yale L.J. 881 (1988).
Quote:
She wrote: It is well settled that “native-born” citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born.
Here is the full quote ...
[LEFT][/LEFT]
[SIZE=2]Despite its. apparent simplicity, the natural-born citizen clause of the Constitution" has never been,completely understood. It is well settled that "native-born" citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born." It is also clear that persons born abroad of alien parents, who later become citizens by naturalization," do not." But whether a person born [SIZE=2]abroad of American parents, or of one American and one alien parent," qualifies/as natural born has never been resolved." Eligibility for children of American Indians born on reservations, persons born in United States territories, children born on American military bases, and children of United States diplomats stationed abroad is also uncertain. [/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][SIZE=2][/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][SIZE=2]This is exactly why we want the links, you posted only the part that bolstered your arguement. That sir is called a smokescreen. I will be back with more links and "FACTS" ...
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
Your Footnote ... on closer examination... oh my... it is about this lawyers feelings on the stipulation of natural born. Some expert. Larry is a fraud.
It has been called “the Constitution’s worst provision It is the “unresolved enigma” of the United States Constitution. It embodies “striking unfairness and dangerous ambiguity.” It was written into the Constitution in 1787 without any record of discussion at the constitutional convention or among the FramersIt has been unchanged ever since. Its meaning has never been construed by the United States Supreme Court or any federal court. The provision in question is Article
]II, Section I, Clause V of the Constitution: “No Person except a natural born Citizen. . . shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”
Those three italicized words appear nowhere else in the Constitution.
They have mystified and sometimes enraged commentators for more than 200
years. This phrase has been the impetus for repeated calls for amendment,
most recently in 2004.
This is a great link, it would have saved me much time. It mentions 3 of the authors that you mention. It also states that there are plenty others that hold another opinion.
Here is a brief exerpt ... I had to type it because the site made it non-copy/paste.
"In 1950 Warren Freedman wrote a comment Titled Presidential Timber: Foreign born children of American parents.
"He does not discuss the fact that the majority opinon appears to "historically show" just the opposite. This declaration is indicitive of the entire article in that it makes ostensive statements of fact, yet provide little actual analysis" ...
Another, "constititional expert" , I think not ...
So "A rouse" again is the perfect name for arus ... so we are not lazy birthers but from my extensive research I have found that at least four of people mentioned are not constitutional experts or made comments stating the ambiquity surrounding the whole foriegn born natural citizen.
I do know of one constitutional expert, Obama ... I am sure he paid close attention to the articles concerning natural born. So you can draw your own conclusions as to why his records are sealed.
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.
