The distinction between ‘natural born citizen’ (A Requirement for presidency) and ‘citizen’ is an important distinction here
citizenship simply requires:
Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates presidential eligibility, requiring the nation’s elected chief to be a “natural born citizen.”
The clause states: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
Read more: Investigation: Obama likely not eligible http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=232213#ixzz1CdrVYVUt
Natural born citizens are citizens born of parents who are both legal natural born citizens
The case you are refering to - amendment 14, concerns citizens- not natural born citizens- after year 1986- before hte amendment, the requirements even for a citizen were different- not that that is the issue- the law clearly states a presidental candidate must be a ‘natural born citizen’
The issue is before the courts, and the supreme court is tryign to decide what it means to be a ‘natural born citizen’- We’ll have to wait to see what is determined
The Supreme Court disagrees with you. It is not necessary to have citizen parents if the child is born on US soil.
The issue is before the courts, and the supreme court is tryign to decide what it means to be a ‘natural born citizen’
It already decided the matter over 100 years ago in US v. Wong Kim Ark.