Wait, this is the holding of Wong Kim Ark??
| Diverse drunken step-uncle's house | 12/08/25 | | disturbing hominid son of senegal | 12/08/25 | | exciting cuckold | 12/08/25 | | Diverse drunken step-uncle's house | 12/08/25 | | thirsty tattoo pervert | 12/08/25 | | Diverse drunken step-uncle's house | 12/08/25 | | thirsty tattoo pervert | 12/08/25 | | Racy effete trailer park lettuce | 12/09/25 | | sexy embarrassed to the bone senate | 12/09/25 | | supple sable philosopher-king space | 12/09/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 8th, 2025 11:37 PM Author: Diverse drunken step-uncle's house
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), is a landmark decision[2] of the U.S. Supreme Court which held that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China", automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth.[3]
Seems like a salient factor that WKA's parents "have a permanent domicile and residence in the united states and are there carrying on business"?
How does this turn into "who, at the time of his birth, entered the country illegally and committed a crime in entering"?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5808198&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5085026",#49495681) |
|
|