In Minor v. Happersett and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. Both courts and ALL 18 justices voted on the same definition of natural-born citizen.
Byu the way, they didn’t exhaustively define natural born citizenship. They may have said children born to two citizen parents are natural born citizens, but I’m sure they didn’t say native borns aren’t.
Yes, actually they did, because they said the 14th amendment, which applies to "native borns" of resident aliens, does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens. That definition comes from outside the Constitution in a self-limiting defintion ... "as distinguished from foreigners or aliens."
“In Minor v. Happersett and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.”
Okay, that’s why I asked why the post I was responding to only mentioned Minor.
“Both courts and ALL 18 justices voted on the same definition of natural-born citizen.”
They didn’t define NBC status, at least not exhaustively. I defy you to quote them saying native borns are not natural born.
“Yes, actually they did, because they said the 14th amendment, which applies to ‘native borns’ of resident aliens, does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens.That definition comes from outside the Constitution in a self-limiting defintion”
No, the 14th amendment does not define who’s an NBC. It defines people born on U.S. soil and subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. law as citizens. Combine that with our knowledge that, among other things, there is no such class as born but not natural born citizens, and we know that NBCs are born citizens.