The graphic that you present on citizenship is simply wrong. Here is an accurate one:
This is the historical understanding of natural born citizenship. It is the understanding of the US Supreme Court and all lower courts. It is the understanding of the legal profession, of all major conservative legal and Constitutional authorities, and of every other credible legal authority, not only now, but throughout American history.
You speak for yourself, and very few others.
You have not one single, noted legal authority to back up your claims.
Not a single conservative leader agrees with you.
Not a single Member of Congress agrees with you.
Not a single Judge agrees with you.
You have misinterpreted the law and history.
Sorry this is not an accurate representation of the historical legal definition of natural born citizen. Historically legal scholars and the SCOTUS have followed Vatel’s “Law of Nations” definition of natural born citizen which is born in the US of two citizen parents.
The 14th ammendment had nothing to do with the natural born citizen definition. It was soley aimed at defining all of the former slaves as citizens.
I don't agree with your chart, and don't agree that it represents the Founding Generation's understanding of the term, Natural Born Citizen. Your chart shows a weak and imperfect form of citizenship -- one which the Framers would not have held up as the unimpeachable standard for the office of President.
The chart I posted represents the purest form of citizenship achievable -- the one that the Framers insisted upon, as the bar for the office of US President.
Use the keyword, "NBC", and read the multitudes of threads posted here, which back up my assertion.