[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I'd bet the house that if the Supreme Court addressed this issue, it would conclude (correctly) that the phrase "natural born citizen" means a person who is a citizen at birth. It would further find that the Constitution left to the Congress the role of defining the rules for citizenship.

The most important thing about the Naturalization Act of 1790, and all the subsequent related Acts, is not the particular rules Congress established for being considered a citizen at birth. It was the mere fact that Congress was establishing rules at all, and that nobody appeared to dispute that was beyond the purview of Congress.

As I said, I'd bet the house on that result, and I'd guess that 95% of Constitutional lawyers would do the same.

[Cboldt]

-- I'd bet the house that if the Supreme Court addressed this issue, it would conclude (correctly) that the phrase "natural born citizen" means a person who is a citizen at birth. It would further find that the Constitution left to the Congress the role of defining the rules for citizenship. --

Don't make the bet. Just friendly advice. Const says Congress makes rules of naturalization. The case of Rogers v. Bellei would not exist at all if Bellie was an NBC.

I don't have time to explain it. Carry on.