Replies

That’s a question I think you have to address to Messrs. Begley and Tepper, or at least to some other experienced litigator.

What??? I asked you. Can you not focus on a simple question. I've already said this is a discussion site. You can't form your own opinion???

My guess? They would like to emphasize the point that the judicial community overwhelmingly reads WKA to say what they think it says.

That's not a very secure viewpoint. It takes 12 citations from other cases, plus 100 overall so-called "birther" cases to show that a legal precedent from a Supreme Court case is "overwhelming"???

"You can't form your own opinion???"
__

LOL, read on. I clearly stated my opinion.

"It takes 12 citations from other cases, plus 100 overall so-called "birther" cases to show that a legal precedent from a Supreme Court case is "overwhelming"???"

And read more carefully, please. I didn't say that the precedent is overwhelming. I said that judicial interpretation of Wong Kim Ark overwhelmingly supports the jus soli point of view rather than the "heritage-based" one. I find your objection to that to be quite baffling, other than the fact that it upsets you that none of the judges agrees with you in the slightest.