“No, I’ve proven it in writing ... again, several times ... “
__
I read Ha Ha’s comment to mean not that you hadn’t committed it to writing, but rather that it is considered to be proof “only in your mind.”
Isn’t it a fact that, since the time Obama’s eligibility was first questioned, there hasn’t been a single judge or recognized Constitutional scholar who has voiced a similar opinion?
No, actually it’s not. The judges in Ankeny v. Indiana said that Minor defined NBC. They opined that there was phantom guidance to go further than this, but they never could support it with actual legal precedence. That court also admitted that the SCOTUS said that the 14th amendment does not define natural-born citizenship.
Yes, that's what I meant. I'm not sure the concept of "proof" even applies in the case of interpretation of SCOTUS decisions.