[Flotsam_Jetsome]

"Tell me again by what authority Congress cannot define who does and who does not meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen."

Certainly: Natural Law. Natural born citizens need no statutory act of man to make them citizens. They simply are, by virtue of their being born on native soil to parents who are themselves citizens. How could they not be natural born citizens? Other citizens, even persons who are declared citizens via statute such as the 14th Amendment, are made so via legalities. Natural born citizens need no such contrivances. Again, they simply are.

Congress has no "authority" to usurp Natural Law. Simple logic, here.

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

One more thing: ". . .meet the criteria of native or natural born citizen."

That wording appears to be misleading doublespeak, to my eye. Surely you didn't intend such? After all, even the 2008 "Obama" campaign website "Fight the Smears" claimed "Obama" to be a "native born citizen" rather than natural born citizen. . .

[Harlan1196]

Hold on - what is “natural” about the requirement for two citizen parents?

English common law was also built on Natural Law - to them, just being born on the soil made one “natural” born.

How many Natural laws are there? Did American founding fathers change Natural Law - in which case why would it be considered natural? Or did they simply recognize a different Natural Law?

[philman_36]

You have to stipulate that it can be done but only by a Constitutional Amendment. Don't get caught.
Naturalization laws don't, and can't, trump the Constitutional requirements of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.