There’s been a lot of time to reverse Wong Kim Ark. It hasn’t happened and its been cited as “stare decisis” as recently as last year.
Tisdale v Obama, US District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— Tisdale v Obama, US District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82011399/Tisdale-v-Obama-EDVA-3-12-cv-00036-Doc-2-ORDER-23-Jan-2012
Yes, I know. Any court or judge who disagrees with you is stupid and corrupt. Save yourself the trouble of writing it again.
I regard your persistence in citing modern day cases as nothing but provocation. I have no respect for modern courts. Utterly NONE. They are clown proceedings with no underlying principle or legitimacy. They are the creaking of the hull plates as this massive ship slowly twists before sinking.
It is pretty much accepted amongst conservatives that the courts are political tools, and do not accurately reflect what is the law, but rather the opinion of the people who are nominated to them. Court decisions are the darling of Liberals, Conservatives tend to loath them because too often have we been the victim of foolhardy and ridiculous pronouncements from the courts.
Why do you persist in citing institutions of which conservatives have precious little respect, and often down right hatred? What sort of conservative hides beneath the black robes of the despised liberal courts?
You have this backwards. Any court which is stupid and corrupt, I will disagree with.
Do you agree with Kelo v New London? Do you agree with Larrance v Texas? Do you agree with Wickard v Fillburn? Do you agree with Roe v Wade, or Plessy v Ferguson? How about Dred Scott v Sanford?
Tell us conservatives who have learned to detest the biased and corrupt court system how you agree with all these despised decisions because the courts "say so."
If you believe the basis of our laws should be "because the courts say so", then you are at complete odds with my understanding of Moral principle, and would no doubt have defended the decisions of the Volksgerichtshof as they stole the money and property from the Jews.
The Courts are not GOD.
This isn't about somebody being stupid simply because they disagree. It's because there's nothing in Supreme Court case law that supports this claim ... and we do have one court that already admitted that Wong Kim Ark did NOT declare its plaintiff to be a natural-born citizen on the basis of the criteria used by the court (thanks, Indiana Appeals Court). This federal court you cited is right to one degree ... it IS well-settled that those person born within the United State are natural-born citizens, but ONLY if they are born to citizen parents. Minor v. Happersett AND U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.