[RegulatorCountry]

I'm accustomed to the "data dump" tactic moreso on Crevo threads, Technical Editor.

I'd like for you to explain, just how this Amendment magically altered a Constitutional eligibility requirement for the office of President.

Such a contention is especially curious, since the specific term "natural born citizen" nowhere appears in the relevant findings of Ark itself.

And, am I under a mistaken impression myself, that Minor v. Happersett confirmed the very understanding of the meaning of the term "natural born citizen" that you're contending was somehow altered by the 14th Amendment some years previously?

[Technical Editor]

I’d like for you to explain, just how this Amendment magically altered a Constitutional eligibility requirement for the office of President.

**The 14th Amendment says there are TWO types of citizens: born and naturalized.

Such a contention is especially curious, since the specific term “natural born citizen” nowhere appears in the relevant findings of Ark itself.

** How can you say that? Natural-born appears 33 (that’s thirty-three) times in the MAJORITY decision.

And, am I under a mistaken impression myself, that Minor v. Happersett confirmed the very understanding of the meaning of the term “natural born citizen” that you’re contending was somehow altered by the 14th Amendment some years previously?

** Wong (1898) supersedes Minor.

[Technical Editor]

You were supposed to want to copy the text, paste it into Word, and have the luxury of searching for text. It was no data dump. I did it so that people who were less inclined to look for Wong themselves might actually read the majority decision.