You know that ‘reading’ thing you keep having trouble with. This is another example. The judge says that the natural born citizen claim was made by the petitioner. And, coincidentally, Diaz was attempting to live permanently and legally in the United States (the reason for his lawsuit). When did Barak Sr. try this?? Will wait until you overwrought fingers can come up with new spin. An honest answer, of course, will be, “You were right again edge919.”
Have you read the Wong case yet?
Diaz was here illegally. He was headed home to Mexico. The Wong parents were here legally. I have shown you the relevant language from Wong at least once, maybe twice or more.
At least you seen to be reading Diaz. Note the stuff that wasn’t there-—Because the Petitioner is attempting to stay here permanently-—
That’s cause it was relevant. Born here=natural born citizen.
Again from Indiana:
The Birthers: Contrary to the thinking of most people on the subject, there’s a very clear distinction between a ‘citizen of the United States’ and a ‘natural born citizen.’(page 12)
REALITY as promulgated by the Indiana Court:
Based upon the language of Art. II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “Natural Born Citizens” for Art. II, section 1. purposes, regardless of the citizenship of the parents.” (Page 17)
parsy, who wishes you would just learn to trust me!