Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CodeToad

I have printed out your reference to U.S.C. 1401 and filed it with my other copies of such. I first refer you to the Constitution which in Article I speaks only to ‘citizen’ and then to Article II which speaks to ‘natural born citizen’ for POTUSA. Obviously the Founders declared a difference to exist. I now refer you to your copy of U.S.C.1401. At the very beginning statement it speaks only to ‘nationals’ and ‘citizens’. There is no mention whatsoever of ‘natural born citizens’ being covered as it does for ‘citizens’. As such it is a reasonable conclusion that U.S.C. 1401 was not intended to deal with ‘natural born citizen’. Your strident comments do not make your case as I read the Constitution and U.S.C.1401.


173 posted on 10/29/2013 1:27:06 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]


To: noinfringers2

Seriously? You’re going to parse ‘citizen’ vs ‘natural born citizen’ as to mean there are two sets of laws for two different kinds of citizens? Are you really that desperate to vilify Cruz?

1401 deal directly with who I and who is not a natural born citizen. It was made for dummies that can’t seem to understand the difference otherwise. There are loads of laws made to clarify and codify the writing of the Constitution and 1401 is one of them.


178 posted on 10/29/2013 1:43:33 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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