“There’s zero percent chance, that when the framers wrote the requirement, they intended for someone born subject to the crown of England (or elsewhere for that matter), would be considered NBC and thus eligible to be the Commander in Chief of the military. For glaringly obvious reason’s I would add.”
Fine, whatever. Agree to disagree. But an actual court, with real judges, decided last year that this is exactly what the Founders meant, for very clear historical reasons, provided the person in question was born under the jurisdiction of the United States. So to say that the chances are zero is to willfully ignore real legal history.
Fine, whatever? For you maybe. Why do you try so hard to dissuade folks from getting at the truth? Why is that?
SCOTUS has decided this? Or, do you mean a lower court?
It can easily be argued that that lower court ignored history itself. Ever hear of activist judges? Are you saying that since a lower court said so, it's therefore 100% accurate and can never be overturned?