f Congress is to adopt a uniform set of rules for naturalization then don't they have to first define who doesn't need to be naturalized, i.e. natural born citizens? No. They only have power over declaring the rule of naturalized citizens.
Your assumption is akin to saying don't we need to define what negative integers is before we define positive integers?
, and the answer is no.
We can define positive integers by induction as:
- Any integer whose value is greater than z is positive. [Dfn]
- Any positive integer incremented by one is itself a positive integer. i.e. P(n) -> n+1
- One is a positive integer. (Zero is an integer, 0+1 yields 1, which is a value greater than zero.)
We now have a definition of positive completely independent of the notion of negative numbers; we could do similar to define negative numbers... though the magnitude actually would tie into positive numbers.
No. They only have power over declaring the rule of naturalized citizens. So then what you're saying is that if someone doesn't fall under the category of a naturalized citizen as defined by U.S. law then they must, by default, be a natural born citizen?