[Nero Germanicus]

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to determine that.” —Supreme Court of the United States, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875).

[SoConPubbie]

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to determine that.” —Supreme Court of the United States, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875).

Exactly.

There is not definition of Natural Born, in the US Constitution, US Law, or Supreme Court Ruling that defines Natural Born as requiring 2 citizen parents at birth for a citizen to be President.

It is the combination of the US Constitution, related (hopefully ;)) US Law, and Supreme Court Rulings that HAVE to be the determination of the definition of Natural Born.

Those arguing that the definition is settled by some outside authority are wrong.

[DiogenesLamp]

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to determine that.” —Supreme Court of the United States, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875).

And what's more, Justice Waite wrote this while they were specifically discussing THE 14TH AMENDMENT, meaning it was deliberately directed at the meaning of the 14th amendment.

It is explicitly stating that 14th amendment citizenship is NOT natural born citizenship.