Replies

So far, Congress has not passed any law that defines "natural born citizen". In 1790, Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1790, which extended the meaning of "natural born citizen" to include the foreign-born children of U.S.-citizen parents:

And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens (Naturalization Act of 1790)

Five years later, Congress repealed the 1790 Act and replaced it with the Naturalization Act of 1795. The wording of the 1795 Act was essentially the same as the 1790 Act, except that the term "natural born citizens" was deleted and replaced with "citizens".

Congress has no power to define who is or is not a natural born citizen, for purposes of Art. II sec. 1. Changing the definition would be changing the Constitution. They only have the power to make a uniform rule of naturalization.

I don't know if they realized that when the changed their 1790 law in 1795, to read "citizen" instead of "natural born citizen" or not. But it seems possible that they realized they had overstepped their bounds, and moved to (quietly) correct the error.

This about it, if they could change the meaning of "Natural Born Citizen", unilaterally, they could change the meaning of "freedom of the press", "freedom of speech", and of "arms", just as easily.

That's not to say they could not pass Constitutional amendment defining "Natural Born Citizen", but that would need to go through the full ratification process and be submitted to the states for ratification.