It’s not a power enumerated to Congress to make any laws pertaining to Consitutional natural born citizenship, jamese777.
That’s why there aren’t any such laws.
Read Osborn v. Bank Of The U.S. and see but one clear example of the Supreme Court’s recognition of this.
However I was talking about CASE law, at the federal district, federal appeals or Supreme Court level not about legislative solutions. There is no definition of Natural Born Citizen in US Supreme Court decisions.
What does Osborn v Bank of the United States have to do with Article Two, Section One, Clause Five?
It has as much to do with it as did the 14th Amendment, jamese777, which is to say nothing. But, it does, however, state quite clearly why there are no laws pertaining to natural born citizens made by Congress, and that is that the Constitution alone makes the distinction, because the enumerated power of the national legislature is to prescribe a uniform law of naturalization. Naturalization has nothing to do with natural born. You can scroll up to my reply to this very thread, at #8377, or, oh, what the heck, I'll post it again:
A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an act of Congress, but the act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise of this power exhausts it so far as respects the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the courts of the United States precisely under the same circumstances under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.
That is the modern, post FDR attitude, and to some extent the long term attitude of the Democrat party. (Jackson, the first Democrat President, for instance said of the Court: "They have made their ruling, let them enforce it
But in reality all branches of the government are bound by the Constitution in their acts, rulings or no rulings. Why else would the Constitution itself say:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;" (Art. VI) The President has his own oath which is given in the Constitution, this clause just requires some oath to support the Constitution, with the wording left up to Congress.