[Ultra Sonic 007]

Such fundamental misunderstanding; I suspect you think the UnitedStates is a democracy too.

The USA is a constitutional republic in terms of its originating structure (even if it is 'de facto' a democracy now in many ways). However, I don't know why you find it controversial that a nation can determine for itself who shall and shall not be citizens of itself.

The English parliament for centuries had statutorily extended "natural born" status to various classes. Congress, per the Constitution, is authorized per Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 to determine the rule of naturalization, i.e. the power to confer citizenship to others (and the duties, privileges, and immunities that come with it).

But, in principle, any nation has the power to determine who is and is not a citizen of itself. That's kind of the point, is it not?

[CDR Kerchner]

You keep manipulating and conflating terms and language. A nation can determine who are its "Citizens". But per Natural Law and the Laws of Nature it cannot determine who is a "natural born Citizen" of the country. The "Citizens" procreate the "natural born Citizen" kind when two Citizen parents (born or naturalized themselves) have their child born in the country. See the clear cut definition found in the preeminent legal treatise on The Law of Nations of Principles of Natural Law by Emer de Vattel (1758/1797), which the founders and framers used to justify the Revolution and write the founding documents. That treatise was also widely used by the U.S. Supreme Court during the first 50 years to start establishing U.S. Federal Common Law. Vattel was cited in the SCOTUS Venus case of 1814. For Vattel's clear cut definition of "natural born Citizen", see Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212: https://lonang.com/library/reference/vattel-law-of-nations/vatt-119/

Also Mr. Ultra Sonic, see the Euler Logic Diagram below if you have trouble with adjectives modifying a noun, and understanding that a "natural born Citizen" is a subset of all "Citizens", the largest subset for most counties, i.e., the children born in the country of its citizen parents, plural. But it seems to me you do not wish to be logical but instead choose to use social engineering skills to manipulate terms and language to push your Progressive agenda to subvert the U.S. Constitution original intent, meaning, and purpose (the WHY) for the "nbC" term.

[A strike]

Of course there can be no rational dispute that a nation can determine the parameters of its citizenry.
The pointed out question at hand Here is whether the Congress can determine definition of natural born Citizen.
As the founders were EXPLICITLY breaking away from ‘English law’, while educational it carries no necessary weight re the US Constitution as written.

-fJRoberts-