“the text does NOT say. It does not say, Springsteen-like, that a president must be “born in the United States.” Yet it would have been so easy to say that, had that been the founders’ legal meaning and the legal purpose!”
The learned professor is soliciting voters to commit an unconstitutional election fraud in that statement. He is obligated to know the Constitution explicitly stated a Senator, a Member of the House of Representatives, and a Supreme Court needed to be no more than a U.S. citizen, whereas the President and the Vice President must be a natural born citizen. Under the code of statutory construction the courts must give separate meanings for the two terms, citizen versus natural born citizen. The professor is trying to deceive the readers into believing the false notion the two terms can be read as equivalents, when the established law adamantly denies that ability. The professor says, “it would have been so easy to say that, had that been the founders’ legal meaning and the legal purpose!” On the contrary, the Founding Fathers did make the meaning and legal purpose clear, the candidate for the office had to meet the same standard for birth with no allegiance at birth or after birth to a foreign sovereign, which is the definition common to that of a natural born subject with the Naturalization Act of 1541 and the definition of a natural born citizen in 1776 before and after the adoption of the Constitution of 1789.