Replies

The conclusion you reach is not clear cut. It certainly does not address the Constitutional distinction for President and all other branches. It flies in the face of all reason to argue that "anchor babys" who never learn English and support the concept of "Aztlan" are "natural born.

A couple of comments:

First the fact that "it was never doubted" that those who met BOTH qualifications were natural-born citizens isn't necessarily a statement that those who meet only one of the qualifications aren't. Gray is simply saying that if people meet both qualifications, there's no room at all for any doubt.

Secondly, you have a point that perhaps "anchor babies" etc. shouldn't be considered natural born citizens. One thing that has happened since the Constitution was adopted is that the world has changed. What used to be a months-long trip to get to the US is now a matter of hours. In other words, when the Constitution was adopted, most foreigner residents were likely here for a long time, if not for the rest of their lives. And foreigners worked harder perhaps in the past to fit in than they do now. There's a practical effect from that. Whether it would change things, I don't know.

I suppose if you believe the Constitution can be amended by judicial fiat you may have a point.

Do I believe the Constitution can be legally amended by fiat? No. Do I believe the Constitution can be practically amended by judicial fiat? One has only to look at the USSC case referenced in my profile page, for example, to recognize that that is indeed the case.

It seems you are better read than I am about the nuts and bolts of court precedent. I never thought the Constitution was written for legal scholars though. A little horse sense should do. However, you said-

Do I believe the Constitution can be legally amended by fiat? No. Do I believe the Constitution can be practically amended by judicial fiat? One has only to look at the USSC case referenced in my profile page, for example, to recognize that that is indeed the case.

and I believe that sums up many of our current troubles. In light of that, I don't think we fundamentally disagree.

Thanks