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

To: editor-surveyor

“They were citizens by the evolution of circumstance when the constitution was ratified.”

Really? The courts have repeatedly said that citizens are either born or naturalized. But you won’t have any trouble, I’m sure, citing a case where the courts discuss evolutionary citizenship, and how it evolved.

If they were grandfathering in NB Subjects, why did they use the generic “citizen”? Hmmm???


957 posted on 03/10/2013 8:39:20 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 953 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

Citizenship didn’t evolve; the circumstance allowing citizenship evolved by the ratification of the constitution, thus the conditions proposed therein came to be.


962 posted on 03/10/2013 8:44:13 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 957 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
If they were grandfathering in NB Subjects...

New Brunswick was separated from Nova Scotia only in 1784, just three years before the Constitutional Convention, and it was full of Loyalists. So I don't think they were worried about New Brunswick Subjects trying to become President of the United States.

1,130 posted on 03/11/2013 2:50:59 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 957 | 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