[BP2]

> It is still good law.

Yes. However, it's the After-Birther’s use & interpretation of Wong that is embarrassingly flawed!

If "Natural Born Citizen" for the office of President was resolved by WONG, Congress would have never seen a need to attempt to define “Natural Born Citizen” as it has numerous times this decade alone. At best it would be seen as needless redundancy; at worst it would be an attempt to override a SCOTUS ruling!

AGAIN, here's just ONE example of a Congressional Bill on that very issue:

108th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 2128

To define the term `natural born Citizen' as used in the Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility for the Office of President.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 25, 2004

Mr. NICKLES (for himself, Ms. LANDRIEU, and Mr. INHOFE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

A BILL

To define the term `natural born Citizen' as used in the Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility for the Office of President.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Natural Born Citizen Act'.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF `NATURAL BORN CITIZEN' .

(a) IN GENERAL- Congress finds and declares that the term `natural born Citizen' in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States means--

(1) any person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; and

(2) any person born outside the United States--

(A) who derives citizenship at birth from a United States citizen parent or parents pursuant to an Act of Congress; or

(B) who is adopted by 18 years of age by a United States citizen parent or parents who are otherwise eligible to transmit citizenship to a biological child pursuant to an Act of Congress.

(b) UNITED STATES- In this section, the term `United States', when used in a geographic sense, means the several States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

[parsifal]

Actually, this was germane. (germane means half german and half french)

“That 1898 SCOTUS Opinion was NEVER intended to determine Presidential Eligibility in the eyes of our Framers — a FACT that you After-Birthers KNOW to be true, but just choose to ignore!”

You are right about the first part. But, when you define “being born in the country” as fitting into it, it stays kinda defined. And, a reasonable person cannot read Wong in its entirety without coming to that conclusion. Over and over and over again.

Now, an unreasonable person can. An unreasonable person can ignore all the language going back to 1608 or earlier. An unreasonable person can say to the ones who believe it “there’s no way you can think that, that Wong defines NBC, without being an Obama lover”

Holler, kick, and scream all you want to. You can not reasonably deny that NBC has been defined in Wong. And you sure can’t in the Indiana case. They come right out and say it, in what, one or two sentences.

Methinks thous dost protest too much.

parsy, who “methinks” a lot