OMG... Congress has no authority to amend the meaning of words in the Constitution. Even if they amend the Constitution they must first NEGATE the clause they wish to amend, then substitute a new clause. This is why acts of Congress have NO BEARING ON THIS ISSUE. All that matters is: What did natural born mean when it was included in the Constitution. I thought conservatives didn’t believe in a “living Constitution.” Gee, guess I was wrong.
Congress didn't do that. The Constitution gives Congress the power to write laws of naturalization. An obvious part of that is to define who doesn't need to be naturalized to be citizens, i.e. natural-born citizens.
This is why acts of Congress have NO BEARING ON THIS ISSUE.
Sure they do.
What did natural born mean when it was included in the Constitution.
That definition depended on who you were talking to. Some, like Vattel, believed citizenship of the parents was the prime deciding factor. Others, like Blackwell, believed it was place of birth that was the deciding factor. Since the Constitution didn't define the term then it was certainly within the province of the Congress to do so.
Gee, guess I was wrong.
I certainly don't think that your being wrong on this question determines if you are conservative or not. And neither should you.