And when there is a question -- say the father was a famous traitor, or the child was born abroad to citizen parents but not returned home until adulthood, or the child born in the US has one resident alien non-citizen parent -- it makes sense to let actual reality inform a ruling about the questionable circumstance of birth. Has the person ever taken advantage of the other citizenship, have they renounced other citizenships available to them via the alien parent's country, have they served their country honorably in a way that clearly demonstrates unquestionable allegiance? All of this might make for interesting conversation, but it has absolutely nothing to do with anything contained in the Constitutional requirement for natural-born citizenship.
There are only two paths to American citizenship- naturalization and citizenship from birth. If you fall into the latter category, than you meet the requirement for running for President. There simply are no other categories.
There are only two paths to American citizenship- naturalization and citizenship from birth. If you fall into the latter category, than you meet the requirement for running for President. That's a very common understanding, but not true -- the few cases that touched upon "natural born" have made it clear that the term is more nuanced.
There simply are no other categories.
Back to argument by punctuation point!