Click a Kitty Thank you, JoeProBono
Sweet Young Dragon Adopts Some Orphans
Lend a helping hand
Donate monthly
Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up
Posted on 02/10/2012 6:27:16 AM PST by Former MSM Viewer
Did Rubios parents become citizens before he was born?
According to the birther movement, it does remove it from being a part of the U.S.
What am I doing? Preparing to fight enemies of the Constitution like you.
I asked what you are going to do about Obama trampling on the constitution. Were you going to argue with Freepers or "don a Constitution Man super hero suit?". All you did was tattle to the moderators that "someone attacked me".
In other words, you real answer was "argue with Freepers".
I am sick of posts that suggest that everyone who is not a birther does not care about the constitution. Particularly when those of you who claim to care spend all your time caring on a conservative message board.
This is the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Good for you. Most of the time, the Freeper Birthers do little more than insult those of us who think nothing can be done about Obama's trampling on the Constitution, other than working toward defeating him in November. If you are doing something more, that's good.
Why should Rubio embrace this nonsense? Nobody else is.
I am everybody. I endorse it, Dave. Does that make YOU a nobody?
The founders had to reject English common law in order to declare themselves to be U.S. citizens. ECL required perpetual allegiance. There’s no parallel for this in U.S. citizenship. ECL prohibited expatriation. This is another part of the law that had to be suspended and/or rejected in order to become citizens. Eventually, the U.S. signed a treaty with England that according to the Supreme Court made persons born in the U.S. British subjects if they adhered to the crown. The Minor court defined NBC as: all children born in the country to citizen parents. U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark cited a ruling that said the white children of aliens born in the country were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States PRIOR to the 14th amendment. Ark then cited Minor as saying that the 14th amendment does NOT define natural-born citizen. Yes, the Supreme court has plenty to say and NONE of it would make Rubio eligible to be president.
The NBC “issue” regarding a candidate’s parents is absurd. These people should check under their beds or dark closets for another boogieman.
No Eric; what is absurd is not understanding that the birthplace and allegiance of the parents shapes the child. Our Founders wanted to guarantee that we did not let the boogieman into the White House. We should have paid attention.
The Constitution of the State of New York in 1777 explicitly defines English Common Law as the basis for the State’s jurisprudence. Habeaus corpus, jury trials, etc. were all elements of English Common Law.
The Ark case in fact would argue that Rubio is a natural born citizen, because in fact it found that Ark was a natural born citizen.
Ark was born in the U.S. to Chinese parents who left the U.S. to go back to China when he was a young child. When he tried to get back into the U.S., during a period where there was strict limits on Chinese immigration, he argued that since he was born in the U.S. he was a U.S. citizen by birth.
The Supreme Court agreed with him. And in that case, the Supreme Court established that there are two, and two only, ways to be a U.S. citizen: you are born a citizen, or you are naturalized a citizen.
Complete and total nonsense.
Wonderful. That's one state. If we'd lived in the United States of New York, you might have a meaningful point. The Supreme Court used a case in New York however to explain that the United States relies elsewhere for citizenship.
The facts disclosed in this case, then, lead irresistibly to the conclusion that it was the fixed determination of Charles Inglis the father, at the declaration of independence, to adhere to his native allegiance. And John Inglis the son must be deemed to have followed the condition of his father, and the character of a British subject attached to and fastened on him also, which he has never attempted to throw off by any act disaffirming the choice made for him by his father.The Ark case in fact would argue that Rubio is a natural born citizen, because in fact it found that Ark was a natural born citizen.
- - -
If born after the 4th of July 1776, and before the 15th of September of the same year, when the British took possession of New York, his infancy incapacitated him from making any election for himself, and his election and character followed that of his father, subject to the right of disaffirmance in a reasonable time after the termination of his minority; which never having been done, he remains a British subject, and disabled from inheriting the land in question.
No, actually it didn't. The Ark case only found Ark to be a citizen of the United States. The Ark court relied on Minor for its definition of NBC: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens. That's why it affirms that the holding in Minor is based on both jus soli and jus sanguinis criteria.
Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, ...The Supreme Court agreed with him. And in that case, the Supreme Court established that there are two, and two only, ways to be a U.S. citizen: you are born a citizen, or you are naturalized a citizen.
You misunderstand the decision. It says there are only two ways to become citizens UNDER the 14th amendment. This court ruled that the 14th amendment only applied to former slaves and to resident aliens. It said the 14th amendment did NOT define natural-born citizenship. It noted that because of Minor's decision, the Supreme Court was " committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment ..."
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American Army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
Natural born citizen means Citizen at Birth and NOTHING ELSE!
I know of not a single elected official or judge in the entire country who disagrees with me on this point.
Natural born citizen means Citizen at Birth and NOTHING ELSE!
I know of not a single elected official or judge in the entire country who disagrees with me on this point.
Natural born citizen means Citizen at Birth and NOTHING ELSE!
I know of not a single elected official or judge in the entire country who disagrees with me on this point.
Birthers tend to be stubborn, know it all fools. They have every right to waste their time, but I am tired of them demanding conservative allegiance to their stupid, wrong headed, false beliefs.
You are wrong.
You do not know what you are talking about.
Not a single elected official agrees with you.
Not a single judge agrees with you.
Not a single conservative legal organization agrees with you.
RUBIO WAS BORN ON AMERICAN SOIL
RUBIO IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.