Why do you think it does. It only contains the word “Citizen”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why do you think the 14th omits Natural Born? I’ll tell you why. Because it identifies the failure of the Framers to adequately define and explain what a NBC is.
They screwed up and left a vague unclear definition. Even the 14th did a piss poor job leaving only the word “citizen’.
But that’s enough for all future Supreme Court and lower court decisions from then on to recognize that any citizen (born here or naturalized here) is eligible.
How hard is that to understand?
The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof.”
Vivek Ramaswampy’s parents were not naturalized Citizens at the time of his birth. He fails the natural born Citizen test.
Everyone at the time knew what it meant. It never occurred to them that people would forget what it meant. The clue to what it means is in the word "citizen."
They screwed up and left a vague unclear definition.
That's one theory. Here is another, and I think I can prove it to any reasonable man.
People like William Rawle deliberately misled the country about what it meant. He purposely wrote the wrong explanation in his law book "A View of the Constitution" and this erroneous explanation became dominant because the book spread so wide and far.
Even the 14th did a piss poor job leaving only the word “citizen’.
If they had tried to make the former slaves "natural born citizens", they would have not only been called "liars", they would probably have had a riot on their hands.
They naturalized them as "citizens", because that is as far as they dared go, and yes, they used the word "naturalization" to describe what they were doing in the debates on the 14th amendment.