“The reason for the NBC clause is very simple...Since the president is also the Commander in Chief of the US military, the founders determined it to be wise to restrict the office of President to those who did not have any form of allegiance with another country.
If you were born in another country, or one or both of your parents are not only citizens of another country, but have not become citizens of the US - would all your loyalties lie with the US? The founders were simply trying to put in a small safegaurd that whomever became Commander in Chief of the entire US military had only one loyalty - and that was to the US.”
Let’s say that’s all true. Too bad for the Framers, as we’ve added a 14th amendment. I’m willing to believe they thought as you say. But they didn’t write down that they president couldn’t be born a dual citizen, just that they had to be born a citizen. There are born dual citizens, and they are qualified to be president, even if it doesn’t fit the Framers’ and your perfect vision.
Nowhere does the Constitution talk about somebody being “born a citizen”. The term is “natural born citizen”. The Founders relied heavily upon Vattel - so much so that George Washington’s copy of Vattel that he had checked out from the library and never returned was recently discovered. Vattel says “natural born citizen” is someone born in the country to citizen parents - which is NOT the same thing as “born a citizen”, since somebody could be born a citizen with only one parent a US citizen.
Since Vattel - the source relied upon by the Founders at the time that they wrote the Constitution - distinguishes between those who were a “citizen at birth” and those who were “natural born citizens”, what legal source do you cite to claim that the Framers actually meant “citizen at birth” instead?