Is that so? Wow, I guess I must have been wrong....
Except I can't help but think there's this funny little thing called the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Now it's all fine and dandy to be an originalist -- I'm one myself -- but of course, even originalists agree that our original Constitution AND all its amendments are valid. Now my version of the 14th Amendment says, in the very first sentence:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
So at least according to that particular scrap of paper, if you're born in the United States, you are a citizen of the United States (and not a naturalized one, either, because they're mentioned separately). So can you please explain again how "the place of birth is not relevant?"
Pretty amazing how newbies flock to this subject.
Yep.
There's good reason this "two citizen parent" argument has received no traction whatsoever outside of the birther circus. It's a load of bunk. That's why nobody's buying it.
You evade the distinction between “citizen” and “natural born citizen.”