[Cold Heat]

They then go on to cite the Naturalization act of 1790 while ignoring the fact that the Naturalization act of 1795 repealed the Naturalization act of 1790 and specifically changed the words natural born citizens with the word citizens implying that they recognized a distinct difference between the two classes of citizens and meant to ensure that NBC status was not transferred to those born "born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States".

I see this all the time, and while some are of that opinion as to the why of the 1795 act and the removal of the term, both side agree that although sentiment was expressed by Congress in the 1790 act, the act was in part, a bridge too far and attempted to define part of article 2. and thus affected the 14th which can only be done via amendment. But you can't argue that the sentiment at the time was in favor of my position as the statute passed.

But later in 1795 rewritten to be the basis of the following naturalization policies of the US which have changed over time, but are constitutional granted authority.

[RegulatorCountry]

I’m intrigued as to just how the 1790 Act affected the 14th Amendment, can you elaborate?

[RC one]

I think it was all about politics and power but someone had the good sense to change it. I do not believe that an amendment is required, only an understanding and the understanding is quite discernible. We know that, at a minimum, a NBC had to be born on US soil by the words of Article II, section 1, clause 5.

It is not left to conjecture to ascertain why the founders included their loophole. They weren't all born in the United States and were not, as such, NBCs. Hamilton, for example, was born in the West Indies. He was a citizen of New York when the declaration of independence was signed however and, at that moment, his citizenship transferred from the Crown to the U.S. and he was, therefore, a citizen at the time of the adoption of the constitution and eligible to be POTUS.

By distinguishing between the two classes of citizens, there can be no doubt that there is a difference and by understanding why they made the distinction, there is little doubt as to what the difference was, A NBC was, at a minimum, born in the United States.

This precedent is almost fully supported by the common law and is expressed in no uncertain terms multiple times in the Wong case.

I have posted it all many times now.