This Internet Article is about 800 pound Gorillas in the room, on several different levels. The first level deals with the two citizen-parent Birthers and the 1875 voting rights case, Minor v. Happersett (MvH). Just like with Breckinridge Long, (see Note 1 below) another MvH-snubbing legal scholar has come to my attention. This one is named George Collins, and in 1884, he wrote Are persons born within the United States Ipso Facto Citizens thereof ?
This was just 9 years after the putative natural born citizen precedent setting MvH case. Like Breckinridge Long, George Collins also failed to mention Minor v. Happersett, even though the whole point of his piece was that a child’s citizenship should be determined by the father’s citizenship. Here is a link to Collins’ article:
I will go deeper into this article at a later date.
The point for now is, that if Minor v. Happersett was sooo definitive in defining citizenship, why was it that nobody knew it at the time??? This particular article was written just 9 years after the case. This is a simple question that has been asked many times at The Birther Think Tank. Just add one more unanswered major anomaly to the two citizen-parent Alternate Reality Universe.
But, I mentioned this Internet Article was about different levels of overlooking the obvious. I first discovered the above piece by Collins by reading Dianna Cotter’s “America’s two unconstitutional Presidents” published December 14, 2009. Miss Cotter is a reporter with the Portland Examiner.
Cotter is interesting because she is also one of the people helping to disseminate the Justiagate nonsense. For the unfamiliar, Justia, an online legal research website supposedly scrubbed links to Minor v. Happersett prior to the 2008 Presidential elections. Justia claims the mistake was a simple programming error which also affected other cases, but Dianna Cotter and Leo Donofrio are convinced this was part of a sinister plot. See for example:
But if MvH isn’t precedent, to anyone outside of Vattel Birther circles, what’s the point??? Why go to all the effort to scrub a case that is irrelevant??? Even more importantly, how do you write an article in December 2009 where the subject author, George Collins, is a person who completely ignored the MvH case decided just 9 years before he wrote his article back in 1884- – -and then come back, as Cotter did in October 2011 and jump on the Minor v. Happersett band wagon. A reporter is supposed to have a nose for the news, and become suspicious when things don’t add up, like they do with Minor v. Happersett.
I do not know Dianna Cotter, so I don’t know why she didn’t catch this. Maybe she just forgot the article she wrote 2 years earlier. Maybe the question of why Collins failed to pick up on this supposedly wonderfully precedental MvH case just never occurred to her. Perhaps all the other cases which failed to recognize MvH or all the multiple anomalies have managed to slip beneath her radar. Or maybe she just has no interest in trying to confirm her own theories.
But, reporters ask questions. It is what we do. That 800 pound gorilla is sitting in the middle of her room and demanding a king’s ransom in bananas. Luckily for her, the two citizen-parent Birthers have plenty.
Note 1: This is the Internet Article about Breckinridge Long:
Note 2: A quick list of anomalies can be found here:
Note 3: Ro-Man, and the Image above:
The image above is from Robot-Monster, one of the worst films of all time. Wiki says:
Robot Monster is a 1953 American science fiction film made in 3-d by Phil Tucker. It is frequently considered one of the worst films ever made. The evil alien Ro-Man Extension XJ-9 (who is simply called “Ro-Man” by the humans) has destroyed all but eight humans on Earth with his “calcinator death ray.” The budget did not allow for a robot costume as intended so director Phil Tucker used his friend George Barrows who had his own gorilla suit to play Ro-Man. Phil Tucker added the helmet.
There is a little pun built into the Easter Egg. (Hover your mouse over the image.)Roman law is said to have been based on descent, not place of birth. From Edward Gibbon’s book, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, some Roman Law:
The above account of slavery and its modifications will be found in strictest conformity with the Institutes of Justinian. Thus, in book 1st, title 3d, it is said: “The first general division of persons in respect to their rights is into freemen and slaves.” The same title, sec. 4th: “Slaves are born such, or become so. They are born such of bondwomen; they become so either by the law of nations, as by capture, or by the civil law.”