Tweet
Dicta: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas; A Natural Born Citizen Is Born To U.S. Parents!?
Birther Report
6/9/2015
Excerpt:
Dualer comments:
You can read the full opinion here.
The White House is happy ,,,
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/06...-clarence.html
Birther Report
6/9/2015
Excerpt:
Dualer comments:
Clarence Thomas just showed his true colors again. Saying in dicta in the USSC yesterday that citizens at birth (8 US Code S. 1401 (c)(d)(g) are considered natural born Citizens, even after saying that the Consular report is part of the Congressional naturalization power.
" B
Although the consular report of birth abroad shares some features with a passport, it is historically associated with naturalization, not foreign affairs. In order to establish a “uniform Rule of Naturalization,” Congress must be able to identify the categories of persons who are eligible for naturalization, along with the rules for that process. Congress thus has always regulated the “acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents . . . in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.”
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 688 (1898); see also Miller v. Albright, 523 U. S. 420, 456 (1998) (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment) (recognizing that “Congress has the power to set the requirements for acquisition of citizenship by persons not born within the territory of the United States”). It has determined that children born abroad to U. S. parents, subject to some exceptions, are natural-born citizens who do not need to go through the naturalization process. 8 U. S. C. §§ 1401(c), (d), (g).
Thomas Concurrance and Dissent, pg. 25, 26
ZIVOTOFSKY v. KERRY
####
Cruz is 8 US Code 1401 (g). This is probably the reason they took this case. [.]
" B
Although the consular report of birth abroad shares some features with a passport, it is historically associated with naturalization, not foreign affairs. In order to establish a “uniform Rule of Naturalization,” Congress must be able to identify the categories of persons who are eligible for naturalization, along with the rules for that process. Congress thus has always regulated the “acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents . . . in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.”
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 688 (1898); see also Miller v. Albright, 523 U. S. 420, 456 (1998) (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment) (recognizing that “Congress has the power to set the requirements for acquisition of citizenship by persons not born within the territory of the United States”). It has determined that children born abroad to U. S. parents, subject to some exceptions, are natural-born citizens who do not need to go through the naturalization process. 8 U. S. C. §§ 1401(c), (d), (g).
Thomas Concurrance and Dissent, pg. 25, 26
ZIVOTOFSKY v. KERRY
####
Cruz is 8 US Code 1401 (g). This is probably the reason they took this case. [.]
You can read the full opinion here.
The White House is happy ,,,
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/06...-clarence.html