He is responsible for creating the nation. Had he not wrote his book, we likely would still be part of England. "American Independence was then and there born."- John Adams.
John Adams:
And what was it that had Motivated James Otis to take up this cause of Independence?
I agree that law does not change the Constitution but when the Constitution specifically enumerates the power of Congress to set the rules of naturalization, that is a direct exercise of Constitutional authority.
The "Rules of Naturalization" do not govern the status of "natural" citizens. They are already "natural citizens" and do not require naturalization.
The term naturalization has a meaning of granting the rights and privileges of a citizen to an alien. Congress is specifically empowered by Article 1 Section 8 to To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
Exactly right, they have no effect on Citizens, so the obvious corollary to your statement is that the laws ONLY AFFECT ALIENS.
The RULES include who is and is not a citizen at birth.
But that is because Congress PUT that there.
A citizen at birth is a naturally born citizen as they have never needed nor required to be naturalized.
Then what do you call the law making them a citizen? A "Natural born" law? Again, it equates to congress redefining the term, which I think you will admit is not tolerable. That they have to fill out no paperwork of naturalization is immaterial. That they have no ceremony is immaterial.
This in no way alters the Constitutional requirements for President.
If Congress passes a law which CHANGES the requirements for the Presidency from what they were originally, to something different, then it is altering the constitution without going through the amendment process, and it is strictly forbidden.
Congress can pass a law "naturalizing" all the citizens of Belize. Will this make such citizens "natural" citizens? No. The idea is ridiculous. So is the Idea that Congress can "naturalize" others, at birth, or otherwise, by whatever criteria, and have them regarded as being "natural" citizens.
Since we are both entrenched in our own perspectives of the issue, there does not seem to be any further agreement possible. Therefore we will have to agree to disagree.