I am aware there was much discussion at the Constitutional Convention as eligibility qualifications for POTUSA. What you quote indicates to me that Madison was ambivalent as to a rigid requirement. I prefer to include Franklin’s presentation to Washington referencing Vattel’s writings and the resulting wording for eligibility. Such is not ambivalent as to place of birth coupled with parentage. How ever accepting what appears to be emphasis on ‘place of birth’ I want the fact as to deposed Muslim President of Egypt having given birth to two sons in the USA that these two men would be eligible for POTUSA by reason of place of birth. I cannot believe the Founding Fathers with their knowledge of the world would have set a criterion that would could allow such a possibility.
The Founding Fathers established a constitutional amendment process that allows for alteration of any and all of their original thinking on any issue. They made it difficult to alter their work by amendment but not impossible. In modern day constitutional interpretation, the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause is the definitive statement and it applies to “all persons...”
Justice Scalia, for example, said the following in oral arguments in a citizenship case:
(Jus soli citizenship is based on the land of birth and jus sanguinis is citizenship based on parentage).
In the oral arguments of Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS (No. 99-2071), Justice Scalia made it clear that his view is that natural born citizenship, the requirement to be president, is based on jus soli (birth in the United States).
Here is the relevant section from the transcript:
Justice Scalia: “… I mean, isn’t it clear that the natural born requirement in the Constitution was intended explicitly to exclude some Englishmen who had come here and spent some time here and then went back and raised their families in England?
They did not want that.
They wanted natural born Americans.
[Ms.]. Davis (Appellant’s Attorney): Yes, by the same token…
Justice Scalia: That is jus soli, isn’t it?
[Ms.] Davis: By the same token, one could say that the provision would apply now to ensure that Congress can’t apply suspect classifications to keep certain individuals from aspiring to those offices.
Justice Scalia: Well, maybe.
I’m just referring to the meaning of natural born within the Constitution.
I don’t think you’re disagreeing.
It requires jus soli, doesn’t it?”
I just don’t think we’re going to find any judge or justice anywhere in 21st century America who doesn’t believe that jus soli isn’t the fundamental requirement for natural born citizenship.