Replies

Here’s the link to the case:

GRAY, J., Opinion of the Court

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

169 U.S. 649
United States v. Wong Kim Ark

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html

Here’s some of the case:

The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;” and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, “if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.”

Now the Birthers can romp and stomp all they want. It ain’t gonna change the facts. The Birthers say they are doing this “for the Constitution” then they need to put up or shut up. This is the current state of the law. Accept it, or become the usurpers.

You got the link to the whole case. Looks to me like that “traffic clerk” got it right. And, FWIW, I read this case about 6 months ago. So you got that part about me not doing my homework wrong, too.

parsy

“if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.” <

parsy, in re Wong Kim Ark, this is the phrase upon which I hang my hopeful not-a-natural-born-citizen hat:

is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen

Now I grant you it is not a Hoot Gibson 10-gallon hat. But to me, it seems to say that the Ark kid is just as good a citizen as a "Natural Born Citizen," which is to say he was not the same thing. A Ham sandwich and a Turkey sandwich are both sandwiches, but if the menu says "Turkey," it doesn't mean "Ham."

Wonder what the court will say.