Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: centurion316
My guess is that this opinion will not hold.

I would like to hear arguments claiming that the 14th repealed article II. What are they going to say? That "Our citizens were natural before, but now they are even more natural!"?

Seriously, it is ridiculous to believe that you can change the meaning of "natural citizen" after the fact. "Natural Citizens" did not need the 14th amendment to be "natural citizens." (Minor v Happersett.)

And for what it's worth, a citizen with divided allegiance is not a "natural citizen." If you can be forced into another nation's army, you aren't the President we've been looking for.

27 posted on 10/01/2012 8:43:48 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

so if some crazy nation has a consciption law that allows going 10 generations back it would disqualify someone?


28 posted on 10/01/2012 8:47:16 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson