The law of 1795 doesn’t require that such born children be “naturalize” so they are considered “natural born”. They are considered citizens at birth.
And how exactly do you square your assertion with the fact that the 1790 Naturalization act which is in line with your interpretation was repealed promptly and replaced with the 1795 act which declared that the children of citizens born abroad were citizens, not natural born citizens? Your assertion makes no sense because if it were true there would have been no reason to repeal & replace the Naturalization act of 1790.
Iirc the 1790 law had the overseas/outside-the-us children included in natural born category, while the 1795 law changed it, leaving overseas/outside-the-US kids as just plain citizens.
Look at it this way, anyone having dual citizenship (example Cruz, born canada, Cuban or Canadian dad, us mom) would not have undivided connection/attachment/influence, which would be problematic if they became president.
That’s what the founders were concerned about, they had just gotten independence from Britain, with its hereditary rulers/heads of state, and they didn’t want anyone with those sentiments making inroads on the new nation, from the highest position of power.
In addition, the concept -and implementation- of elected head of state was just not done back then.
There still were British loyalists in the colonies, with royalist thinking/ideology.
They may not have established themselves as us citizens.
That’s why the “citizen at the time of adoption” was in the qualifications for president.
Then later on, when the next generation was coming up, they wanted “natural born” (no loyalty to another nation), to preclude royalists from getting into office.
Back then, the wife took her husband’s citizenship, so “citizens” meant the man+wife as a unit; a couple.
Then, if the couple was a citizen, and they were in the US, the child would also be a citizen, with no question as to what nation had claim on their allegiance.
The whole body of law after the qualifications set out in the Constitution/bill of rights came as a result of questions ...
What if the couple is overseas, what if just the mom is a citizen, what if just the dad is a citizen, what if the dad isn’t a citizen, but has residency in the US, what if the mom was a widow, what if the mom was unmarried, etc etc.
Ray76,
I meant to ping you, but I forgot to put the “76” after the “ray”...