“natural law argument”
Which is a bogus argument. Anything that is natural law cannot be argued, such as gravity. Who is a citizen is arguable and therefore not “natural law”. Hells Bells, I can get 10 people in a room arguing this subject and we’ll get 11 opinions about who is a citizen. That isn’t natural law.
There is a 'natural law' of physics and a natural law of logic and reason.
Concepts such as - you neither spend your way to prosperity nor regulate your way to freedom - would be an expression of such logic.
Another thing that cannot be argued is that our children belong to THEIR PARENTS, not the government, so why would the government get to decide that a parent could NOT pass their citizenship on to their child?
That is true.
Who is a citizen is arguable and therefore not “natural law”.
Not if it is a "natural" citizen. That's the whole point, it's NOT POSSIBLE to argue that a person born to two Americans inside the borders of the United States can be a citizen of any other country. As Certain as the law of Gravity, they are attached to one, and only one, nation.
If their citizenship can be argued, then it isn't natural.
Hells Bells, I can get 10 people in a room arguing this subject and we’ll get 11 opinions about who is a citizen. That isn’t natural law.
You can get 10 ignorant idiots arguing about gravity too, but we are pre-supposing non ignorant and non idiots. In that case, they cannot argue about someone born to two citizen parents inside the United States.
They can argue about those born elsewhere, or they can argue about those born to foreign parents, but they cannot argue about those born to American Parents inside the Nation. Simply can't be done. (by non-idiots.)