You do know your tag line isn’t accurate, right?
At this point, that should be the legal standard.
THE HELL YOU SAY!
MINOR v. HAPPERSETT REVISITED.
the only time the US Supreme Court ever did define the class of persons who were POTUS eligible under Article 2 Section 1 was in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), wherein it was held:
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.
Theres a quote for you. It really exists. And it tells you exactly who are natural-born citizens; those born in the country of parents who are citizens. The words are plain-spoken and self-evident. There are two classes of persons discussed in the above quotation. Those born in the country of citizen parents were labeled by the Court as natives or natural-born citizens, but these were also further identified as being distinguished from aliens or foreigners. The distinction is crucial.
https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/minor-v-happersett-revisited-2/
his tagline is accurate.