definition means born in US to two US citizens.
Not quite accurate...
I think born of two US Citizens is enough....
Particulary when one is serving the US Military for example...like McCain's father was...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to get into a protracted fight over it with anyone, but being born on US soil to Aliens is enough to make you a Natural Born Citizen. See US v. Wong.
Chester A. Arthur, President was born to William and Malvina Arthur in 1829 or 30 (there is some dispute). Malvina was born in Vermont but at the time citizenship of a woman was determined by marriage to her husband. She was married to William Arthur who was an IRISH citizen and did not obtain his US Citizenship until Chester was 14 years old.
I don't want to argue with the "two US citizen" people here, I'll agree to disagree with you. History is on my side: Chester A. Arthur was a first generation American who became President without challenge.
Just for kicks in US v. Wong 169 US 649 (USSC 1898) on page 655 you find the justice discussing English Common law which it was determined by this case was the basis for and explanation of Natural Born Citizen. The actual quote from US v. Wong p. 655 is:
"The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance—also called 'ligealty,' 'obedience,' 'faith,' or 'power'—of the king. The principle embraced all persons born within the king's allegiance, and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual,—as expressed in the maxim, 'Protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem,'—and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance; but were predicable of aliens in amity, so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens, were therefore natural-born subjects. . . ." Emphasis added by me.
Clearly the decision of the US Supreme Court in Wong states that Children born in England, of such aliens, were therefore Natural-born subjects. . . The Court goes on to assert that this English Common law is what governs the interpretation of Art II of our US Constitution.
I will not get drawn into a fight over this. If you disagree I'm ok with it. Just posting for your information.