“True” in this case, of political practice, is not and cannot be a philosophical ideal, according to the line of development of the national ideology of the United States, which comes via Aristotle and Locke, etc.
If we set up a conflict between the rational-empirical and the ideal, we come back to Aristotle vs Plato.
The “natural born” position is very much a Platonic one, of imagining an ideal form.
I do not believe that truth and the law must be mutually exclusive, though in observing it all my life, it often seems to be the case.
The “natural born” position is very much a Platonic one, of imagining an ideal form.
If you look at the history of it, Jus Sanguinus seems to be the vastly dominant method used going all the way back to the Greeks. Aristotle himself mentions it.
But the citizen whom we are seeking to define is a citizen in the strictest sense, against whom no such exception can be taken, and his special characteristic is that he shares in the administration of justice, and in offices. ... But in practice a citizen is defined to be one of whom both the parents are citizens;