note: this was done unilaterally and is not necessarily adhered to by the various tribes. The Navaho for example consider themselves sovereign.
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > All Native Americans were declared US citizens subsequent to that. > Somewhere in the 20's? Dawes Act? Don't make me look it up, but it's > so. > > On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the >> jurisdiction <http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#JURIS> thereof, >> are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." >> >> I think most of the confusion about the issue comes from the "jurisdiction >> thereof" clause. >> >> The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted on July 9, 1868. >> >> Here is a summary of a case almost 20 years later. >> >> >> In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884), the Supreme Court denied the >> birthright citizenship claim of an American Indian. The court ruled that >> *being >> born in the territory of the United States is not sufficient for citizenship >> *; those who wish to claim citizenship by birth must be born subject to the >> jurisdiction of the United States. The court's majority held that the >> children of Native Americans were: >> >> "no more 'born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction >> thereof,' within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth >> Amendment, than the children of subjects of any foreign government born >> within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United >> States of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations. >> >> >> Here are some quotes and from and info about some of the framers of the >> Fourteenth Amendment. >> >> Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (39th Congress), James F. Wilson >> of Iowa, added on March 1, 1866: We must depend on the general law relating >> to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and >> that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United >> States is a natural-born citizen of such States, *except* that of children >> born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign >> Governments. >> >> Framer of the Fourteenth Amendments first section, John Bingham, said *Sec. >> 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes* meant *every human being born within the >> jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any >> foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a >> natural born citizen.* If this statute merely reaffirmed the old common law >> rule of citizenship by birth then the condition of the parents would be >> entirely irrelevant. >> >> >> >> 'How can people say they want to have judges that "uphold the Constitution" >> and then do something to blatantly in the face of the plain wording of that >> very same document?' >> >> Based on the case above and quotes from the framers of the amendment, it >> doesn't seem to be blatantly flying in the face of the amendment, unless you >> count the Constitution as a "living and breathing" document, which I do not. >> >> >> >> >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States_of_America#cite_note-1 >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317045 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
