Because the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen," we must look to the law to define it. If the birthers are correct that there are multiple types of born citizens, why doesn't the law reflect this? Why has not a single judge ever accepted such an argument?
Yes. The law as understood by the framers of the Constitution, when they ratified it. You can't change the Constitution by mere statute. A constitutional amendment is required to do that.
If the birthers are correct that there are multiple types of born citizens, why doesn't the law reflect this? Why has not a single judge ever accepted such an argument?
Judges are also bound by the Constitution, having sworn to support and defend it, no matter what the legislative branch, or anyone else, may or may not do.