“The District ruled she was a natural born citizen of the United States and the Circuit Court affirmed the ruling. SCOTUS affirmed, but modified the ruling to opine Marie Elg was a natural born citizen in the United States.”
Have you even read the SCOTUS opinion in Perkins v Elg?
Marie Elg sued the Secretary of Labor, the Acting Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization and the Secretary of State. The District Court issued a decree releasing the Secretary of State from the case.
“The District Court overruled the motion as to the Secretary of Labor and the Commissioner of Immigration and entered a decree declaring that the plaintiff is a native citizen of the United States but directing that the complaint be dismissed as to the Secretary of State because of his official discretion in the issue of passports. On cross-appeals, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decree, 69 App.D.C. 175, 99 F.2d 408. Certiorari was granted, December 5, 1938, 305 U.S. 591.”
The Supreme Court affirmed the decree but modified it by adding back the Secretary of State to the compliant.
“The decree will be modified accordingly so as to strike out that portion which dismisses the bill of complaint as to the Secretary of State, and so as to include him in the declaratory provision of the decree, and as so modified the decree is affirmed.”
It’s better when you make stuff up to limit it to things that cannot be easily verified. Stuff like imaginary CLNs. Just a suggestion.
Perkins v. Elg, 307 US 325 - Supreme Court 1939: "We conclude that respondent has not lost her citizenship in the United States and is entitled to all the rights and privileges of that citizenship.
Fifth. The cross petition of Miss Elg, upon which certiorari was granted in No. 455, is addressed to the part of the decree below which dismissed the bill of complaint as against the Secretary of State. The dismissal was upon the ground that the court would not undertake by mandamus to compel the issuance of a passport or control by means of a declaratory judgment the discretion of the Secretary of State. But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg "solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship." The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants 350*350 (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227), declared Miss Elg "to be a natural born citizen of the United States," and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship.
The decree will be modified accordingly so as to strike out that portion which dismisses the bill of complaint as to the Secretary of State, and so as to include him in the declaratory provision of the decree, and as so modified the decree is affirmed."
This is a very important case to the career professionals to the State Department and completely misunderstood by the career opportunists in the DoJ. SCOTUS ruled Ms. Elg was a natural born citizen in the United States and not of the United States.
Natural born citizenship status has little to do with place of birth and everything to do with allegiance and obligations to the foreign state.