There seem to be at least two schools of thought on this subject. I tend to buy into NBC meaning “born of two US citizens, regardless of location.” But I have seen people argue other points of view. I don’t know all the court decisions, but we have now got to the point it means “anybody born here.” Which I find ridiculous, call me old-fashioned.
I find it ridiculous as well, otherwise why preface citizen with natural born if it didn't have a different definition.
To my knowledge, the issue has never been defined or decided by SCOTUS.
However, historically, when this clause was put in, nobody could have been a citizen because he was born of two US citizen parents, since his parents could not possibly have been US citizens because the US did not exist at that time. Thus, most of the parents of US citizens at that time would have been British or other European citizens.
The Founders obviously regarded the location of the birth as the important point. They also included people who had not been born in the US but had come here and been living in future US territory at the time of independence (hence, the phrase, a citizen at the time of...etc.), but that was only for the period at the time of the Signing.
So I’d say it’s geographical. You’re born here, you’re a US citizen.
I still don’t think he was born here, but that’s beside the point.
Born anywhere to two US citizen parents may qualify but I don’t want a President that grew up in another country.