543 words (tens of thousands in linked posts)
As I’ve written now in 36 articles, ‘birthright citizenship’ didn’t start with the 14th Amendment (1866-1869) but the Wong Kim Ark case (1898).
The Chinese were a major influence in San Francisco and California; thanks to immigration, their work ethic, and ease of access to the California gold fields. However, due to the insurrmountable challenges of religion, language, and culture, the U.S. government agreed to a treaty and statutes excluding the Chinese from citizenship application.
The Burlingame Treaty of 1868 was approved by the Chinese Emperor, jealous of his people; and their allegiance was his to hold without reservation.
It is still this way today. The Chinese Communist Party has infiltrated the U.S. Chinese community and has made it clear that all of Chinese descent still owe allegiance, and if asked must perform acts of espionage and intellectual property theft.1
When a 22-year old Chinese cook sued for ‘native born’ citizenship, he was backed by the Chinese Merchants’ Association (The Tong). I have no proof of this, but look at the results. Once the U.S. Supreme Court changed naturalization law to benefit Wong, the Chinese suddenly became a powerful voting block.
Today, the Democrats are abusing Wong’s birthright citizenship case to overwhelm the states with indigent, stressing hospitals and social services. They have become a large enough voting block, thanks to NO ID Sanctuary States and Ballot Harvesting, to flip national elections. Counted in the census, they give Democrats at least an 8 Elector headstart in every federal election.
Back in the 1700’s, the colonies were under British rule and any British loyalist having children produced British ‘natural born subjects.’ However, when the the U.S. constitution was ‘adopted,’ ratifying a federation of states, children born on U.S. soil became a natural born citizen of that state–but with one caveat: the father had to have declared himself allegiant to the United States. Any British loyalists still in the U.S. did not bear U.S. citizen children, but under the 1772 British Nationality Act bore natural born British subjects. This undermines Justice Gray’s reasoning in the Wong Kim Ark case.
The proof is in Article II’s presidential requirements. The child had to have been born to a U.S. citizen father naturalized by the father’s change in allegiance to the newly adopted constitution, or a ‘natural born citizen,’ i.e., born to a U.S. citizen father. And the First Uniform Naturalization Act of 1790 did not require a hint of ‘born in the United States;’ as those born on foreign soil were ‘as natural born citizens;’ same rules as the British followed.
So, those lawmakers and philosophers who claimed ‘common law’ of England and ‘place of birth’ (jus soli) was the fundamental principle of nationality and allegiance failed to understand whatever law they read, be it Blackstone or even going back to Emerich de Vattel. Because even under a lordship’s iron claim over his feudal villages and ‘villains’ born within owing him their undying allegiance, that demand did not apply to ‘sojourners,’ travelers from foriegn climes.
This simplifies the matter, but the research and proof I’ve written since personally speaking up in 2008, challenging Barack Obama’s claim to being and Article II Natural Born Citizen, is linked below:
https://paraleaglenm.com/2009/02/27/barack-hussein-obama-a-natural-born-subject-of-great-britain/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2009/03/19/hollister-vs-obama/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2009/05/16/my-letter-to-justices-roberts-scalia-alito-thomas-and-kennedy/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/01/07/who-is-a-citizen-at-birth-or-a-natural-born-citizen/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/02/24/fax-this-memo-to-your-congressman-asap/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/04/17/birth-certificate-not-determinative-of-natural-born-citizenship/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/04/29/the-first-eligibility-case-1789/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/05/01/ambassador-keyes-unconstitutional-amendment-to-article-ii/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/06/30/my-e-mail-to-rep-thaddeus-mccotter/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2011/10/18/the-transition-from-jus-soli-obama-not-a-natural-born-citizen/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2012/03/13/my-blogs-on-obama-summarized/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2013/06/03/the-immigration-reform-fiasco/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2013/06/21/simple-truth-of-immigration-law-viz-immigration-reform-act/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2013/11/24/letter-to-mark-levin-esq-through-landmark-legal/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2018/01/18/a-picture-of-wong-kim-ark/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2016/12/25/dr-orly-taitz-vindicated/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2018/02/14/copy-and-send-this-to-your-congressmen/
https://paraleaglenm.com/2018/02/16/justice-horace-gray-judge-or-legislator/
Paralegalnm's Blog 
Leave a reply to BETTER LATE THAN NEVER, MARK LEVIN ALMOST NAILS IT–Citizenship at Birth Doesn’t Apply to Children of Non-Citizens – The Post & Email Cancel reply