"But the question remains whether the term "natural born Citizen" used in Article II include the parliamentary rule jus sanguinis in addition to the common law principle of jus soli to inform the meaning of "citizen" in the Fourteenth Amendment as well as the natural-born-citizenship requirement of Article II, and noted that any right to citizenship through jus sanguinis was available only by statute, and not through the Constitution.
Notwithstanding the Supreme Court's discussion in Wong Kim Ark,
a majority of commentators today argue that the Presidential Eligibility Clause incorporates both the common-law and English statutory principles and that therefore, Michigan Governor George Romney, whop was born to American parents outside of the United States, was eligible to seek the Presidency in 1968."
George Romney was never put on any state presidential ballot to be challenged. The point doesn't make the argument. And we have a logical disconnect in his argument. American parents who have children overseas who can receive foreign citizenship at birth also satisfy the natural born citizen clause? And by the same logic, that allegiances of foreign parents, who could be illegal US travelers, who give birth to children inside the US and thereby pass on their foreign citizenship via jus sanguinis to their offspring are also natural born citizens?
We see on the same page Where Meese says,
"Although any citizen may become a member of Congress so long as he has held citizenship for the requisite time period, to be President, One must be "a natural born Citizen." Undivided loyalty to the United State was a prime concern."
What Ed Meese has proposed is a dilution to the natural born citizen clause if not a contradiction to what he has written here. If the US Constitutional Founders were seeking the safeguard, as Ed Meese said, of the natural born citizen clause to keep the presidents loyal to ONLY to the United States, there is noway he can honestly conclude that foreign born citizens and who acquired duel citizens at birth are natural born citizens under Article 2, Section 1, clause 5.
"Who Can Be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma"
No wonder why the title say it's an "Unresolved Enigma."
If you are fair about my posting history on this subject, I have said MANY times, that this is a undecided Constitutional issues. While the Supreme Court in MANY cases has offered opinions in dicta with respect to the import of natural-born, it has never been the central legal holding of ANY Supreme Court case. So, plainly as a matter of law, the issue is undecided.
But, it's also my position that it is clear that if this issue should ever be brought up in the foreseeable future, the Supremes will affirm the prevailing and conventional wisdom - that birth in America subject to the jurisdiction thereof, and irrespective of parentage, will constitute a natural-born citizen.