LMAO!!! Nice try, but no cigar!<quoted text>
I am going to show you why you are wrong... then I am putting it to bed. The whole argument is moot. Obama is here and will not depart till 2016.
The comma isn't nearly important as the phrase "...in my opinion".
The supreme court disagreed with his opinion.
Again, this was a speech. Not law. And LAW is all that matters in this whole spun out attempt to change reality.
1889 Wong Kim Ark is the LAW.
Born here = Citizenship And that is all there is. As posted in #178318.
LAW from 1889 trumps a speech from 1866 every time.
It doesn't matter who is subject to what and where comma's land in an old speech.
Maybe, someday... the Supreme Court will change it's mind. But that day is not today. And until that day comes...
Ark is the law. All else is bullshit.
I would be happy to discuss whether we think it is wrong or not. However, I don't see much of a point. There are lots of laws that individuals think are wrong or unfair.
What I won't do is pretend that a speech trumps SCOTUS. That is where we venture into play law. And the only thing I like less than play law, is play science.
I won't waste my time. However, I do think that you dug as hard as you could for something...anything that would make Obama's presidency seem illegitimate. And you did a better job than I could have. That was as obscure as it gets.
The Globe is the Official record of congress, what Howard said was accepted in it entirety and became the law of the land in 1868.
Oh, the USSC didn't even refer to his opinion, they chose to use English common law and discarded Constitutional Law.
In short the USSC violated the Constitution and violations of the Constitution does not make law or precedent.