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

To: Nero Germanicus

Minor said the 14th amendment does not define natural-born citizen. Nothing has been “merged” as you are claiming.


228 posted on 10/29/2013 7:24:28 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]


To: edge919

Obviously you didn’t understand or chose to ignore “common-law” in my post. Can you name any court decision since the adoption of the 14th Amendment that differentiates between an Article 2, Section 1 “Natural Born Citizen” and a 14th Amendment “Citizen of the United States At Birth?” That is what I meant by definitions “merging.”
For example, here’s a judicial ruling that reflects the merger: U.S. District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— Tisdale v. Obama, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/82011399/Tisdale-v-Obama-EDVA-3-12-cv-00036-Doc-2-ORDER-23-Jan-2012


253 posted on 10/30/2013 10:56:09 AM PDT by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | 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