Trouble is that the Constitution doesn’t actually define what the term “natural born citizen” means. In cases like this, laws passed by Congress and/or court decisions usually form the basis upon which such definitions are made. If Congress’ definition is faulty, then someone would sue, take the case to the SCOTUS and it would then be incumbent upon the SCOTUS to settle the definition of the term “Natural Born Citizen”. It seems pretty clear, though, that the term has historically meant a person who is a citizen of the US from birth, and has not had to become one through a naturalization process.
I agree; that is a problem.
In cases like this, laws passed by Congress and/or court decisions usually form the basis upon which such definitions are made. If Congress’ definition is faulty, then someone would sue, take the case to the SCOTUS and it would then be incumbent upon the SCOTUS to settle the definition of the term “Natural Born Citizen”. It seems pretty clear, though, that the term has historically meant a person who is a citizen of the US from birth, and has not had to become one through a naturalization process.
Except here's a problem: Congress has power over naturalization. They could say that anyone born in the US, or to a single citizen whether here or abroad, is a citizen — and that would all be perfectly kosher under their power to define a uniform rule for naturalization, but a naturalized citizen is different from a Natural Born Citizen.
And, to complicate matters, consider how many open-borders types permeate congress [and the federal government in general] — this alone biases them to confuse the issue, because they are tied to their open-border NWO ideology there is little to no loyalty from them to the nation, Republican or Democrat, Legislative, Executive, or Judicial.
“Trouble is that the Constitution doesn’t actually define what the term “natural born citizen” means.”
The Constitution also doesn’t actually define what the term “arms” means, as in the second amendment “..keep and bear arms...”
Does “arms” include the hands or not?
It is amazing how many people there are who cannot distinguish between the USE of a term in the Constitution and the DEFINITION of a term in the Constitution. I couldn’t count the posts on FR I’ve read that say that “the Constitution defines a Natural Born Citizen as...”