[q_an_a]

I doubt that the Founders imagined that a child could be on a trip with his parents or that a parent could be in the service protecting America while being based in Germany or Japan, when they wrote about “natural born”.

[William Tell]

q_an_a said: I doubt that the Founders imagined that a child could be on a trip with his parents or that a parent could be in the service protecting America while being based in Germany or Japan, when they wrote about “natural born”

As the video explains, the requirement for a "natural born citizen" was to prevent anyone with a reason to have divided loyalties from being President.

A soldier who is a U.S. citizen serving overseas accompanied by his U.S. citizen wife would be able to have children with no presumption of divided loyalties on the part of the children.

A U.S. citizen who is born IN THE U.S. to immigrants who are not U.S. citizens could be expected to have extremely divided loyalties.

[ifinnegan]

I doubt that the Founders imagined that a child could be on a trip with his parents or that a parent could be in the service protecting America while being based in Germany or Japan, when they wrote about “natural born”.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 imagined just that:

"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens"

[bluecat6]

They most certainly did imagine these scenarios.

That is why in original Immigration Act of 1790 the founding fathers put into words what they ‘considered as’ a natural-born Citizen.

What they ‘considered as’ was a person born to American parents. Period. Regardless of where the physical birth took place. Place of birth had absolutely no bearing on the being ‘considered as’ a natural born Citizen.

Note the emphasis on ‘considered as’. They were not bold enough to flat out declare a child born to American parents to actually BE a natural born Citizen. But they were to be ‘considered as’ such.

Why did they do this. Because American blue bloods were still traveling to Europe after the formation of the country. And many diplomats were spending time in France. So they wanted their children who may be born overseas to still be eligible for the office of POTUS.

However, in 1975 the language just ‘disappears’ from the updated immigration act. Likely because it attempted to modify the Constitution with a law. And that is not allowed.

So in the raging debates of jus soli or jus sanguinis the founding fathers put into codified law what they thought was more important - it was blood, not dirt.