"It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.
Whats that quote supposed to prove?
Ah yes, another 2009 sing-on. Give your source, obot so we can make sure you’re not misquoting to serve axelsleazy’s talking points.
I mean, what background could James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, have for really understanding what the phrase "natural born citizen" means?
What's his credentials and claim for knowledge to try to usurp what thousands of birthers and Corsi and WND readers all KNOW as fact?
/sarc
"It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.
What? You found the only tool in your bag is a hammer and all your problems must therefore be nails? Your argument as been refuted, yet here you are persistent in it. Were Madison's comment the law of the land it would have made citizens of Slaves and Indians, yet we know for a fact they were not until they were manumitted and/or naturalized.
You simply don't seem to comprehend that the facts contradict the only quote (and that offhand) you have in support of your position. The seating of Mr. Smith to the US congress not only did not repeal article II, it did not even address it.