The US has never used a strict version of either, but instead has generally used a hybrid definition of both. The first Congress (1790) defined "natural born citizen" with an exclusion based on the father's nationality. Later law put it the opposite way in cases of illegitimate children, where the mother's nationality is the one that mattered. The government didn't want citizen claims made by the illegitimate children of our military members serving abroad.
The original intent of the clause had to do with holding office while having an allegiance to a foreign sovereign nation. Far as I can tell, Obama's only allegiance is to himself.
In an interesting twist to this topic, McCain was born in Panama, where his father was stationed when he was born. His natural born citizenship came about through a law passed after he was born that had a retroactive provision that fit cases like his.
Show me the constitutional reference, please?
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; -snip-
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization
The 1790 law was overturned in 1795.
The new law is mute on what ‘natural born citizen’ means.
As to being born overseas? One can be a citizen certainly, if he has a certificate of US citizen born abroad filed with the local embassy, AND he asserts his US citizenship when he reaches majority.
As to Constitutional eligibility? That is the subject of a rather lively debate. Sen Claire McCaskill (D) submitted a bill to establish the eligibility of anyone born to a U.S. citizen who is serving overseas as an active or reserve member of the U.S. armed forces.
Why? Because senator McCain’s father was a Navy officer serving in the Canal Zone when McCain was born in Panama (NOT IN THE CANAL ZONE).
The laws was never passed. Whether McCain is eligible is still an open question.
How much worse for Obama if he was born in Kenya (or anywhere outside the US)! Maybe that’s why Obama tried to get a phrase added to the McCaskill bill to allow any descendant of active duty military personnel counted as ‘natural born’
As it stands now, IF Obama was born in Kenya to an American mom, he would only be presumed to be a US citizen ONLY IF she WASN’T married to a Kenyan. Otherwise he would be a Kenyan by birth.
If she wasn’t married, he’d be a bastard, but he’d be an AMERICAN bastard, under current law.
BUT keep in mind that if he is a bastard, under the laws that were in force AT THE TIME OF BIRTH, he wouldn’t qualify as a citizen, due to his mom not satisfying the age and residency requirements.
But that’s OK, because under current law he would be an American by birth if Stanley Ann wasn’t married, and he was born in Kenya.
And if that’s not enough even if he is a citizen by birth, he may or may not meet the Constitutional requirement of being a natural born citizen. Once again, what exactly that turn of phrase means is the subject of a rather lively debate at the moment.