Since there is no US law that states someone born with foreign citizenship is in fact a Natural Born Citizen, the question remains:
How can a Natural Born Citizen’s status be “Governed” by Great Britain?
Of course. That simply proves my point, that one country's citizenship laws do not govern other country's citizenship laws.
"A BORN Citizen is a natural born citizen and the other category is a naturalized citizen, ever since 1868. "
Complete bull, and you know it. Again, there is no law in the U.S., or court decision, that makes a "born" citizen as "Natural Born" citizen. The very notion defies the very meaning of "Natural" born. It's Natural vs. statutory.
There is no change in qualifications either from what the Constitution says.
ALL persons means ALL persons.
And "subject to the jurisdiction" means "subject to the jurisdiction".
A BORN Citizen is a natural born citizen and the other category is a naturalized citizen, ever since 1868.
Where are the words "natural born citizen" in the 14th Amendment???
Born citizens can be President, naturalized citizens cannot.
Natural born citizenship is the most certain and loyal form of citizenship according to the Constitution allowing access to the highest office in the land, however your definition of natural born citizenship turns that upside down, making naturalized citizens more loyal and trustworthy to this nation than those you define as "natural born citizens".
“There is no exception or special category for presidential candidates in the 14th Amendment. ALL persons means ALL persons. A BORN Citizen is a natural born citizen and the other category is a naturalized citizen, ever since 1868.”
Wrong.
In the 1875 Minor ruling by SCOTUS, the NBC issue was still unresolved, which is after the 14A was passed in 1968.
See explicit lack of NBC resolution below, which was not resolved by Wong either:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0088_0162_ZO.html
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
The 14th amendment was not passed until the late 1860s. The Natural Born citizen clause was included in the original Constitution passed in 1787. The former can hardly govern the latter. Oh it could if it said "All persons born in the US are Natural Born Citizens" or something similar. It says only that they are citizens. The 14th thus did not change the definition of natural born citizen, which remains what it was in 1787.