[DiogenesLamp]

That matters not at all. It was not stripped out of the Constitution.

The definition was never put into the constitution.

Then why did the Founders, who debated over every jot and tittle that was written, put it in the Constitution, if it cannot be defined by law.

Precisely because it is a product of natural law, and not man made law. It was not subject to meddling by congress.

The Founders consulted Blackstone’s works, it is in his writings.

It is absolutely *NOT* in Blackstone's writings. Some years ago someone posted a link to the complete works of Blackstone, and I did word searches for the word "citizen."

If I recall correctly, "Citizen" was in there about 5 times, and it was always used in the context of a "citizen of London" or some other city.

"Citizen" was not a common word in the English of 1776. The normal word was "subject", which is what does actually come from English common law.

Our modern meaning of the word "Citizen" comes from Switzerland, which was the only Republic in the world in 1776.

Here is an English dictionary from the 1768s. See how it defines "Citizen."

A dictionary of the English language. by Samuel Johnson, 1768.

[odawg]

I will never comprehend why people like you get your panties in a wad over this subject.

I have talked with people in my grandparents generation. They say, yes, they were taught about a natural born citizens, the offspring of citizen parents. It was taught nationwide. I was taught that in college by tenured college professor with Phds in the 70s.

Can you not comprehend you blockhead. The FOUNDERS of the nation, the ones who wrote the Constitution, wrote it in. If if were freaking meaningless, why in hell did they put it in there as one of only three critical qualifications to be president of the United States.

Can you explain that to me?

And yes, natural born citizenship was mentioned in British law, which is where the writers of the Constiution got their understanding of law.