[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

"That the children of persons duly naturalized dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States shall be considered as citizens of the United States"

The concern at that time was British impressment, which was justified by the British on the grounds that all children born to British fathers are “natural born citizens” of England, and so it is perfectly fine to force American sailors to serve the crown. Consequently, to not appear hypocrites, the United States removed such language from the text, as you see from the 1790 act to this one.

Furthermore, it's not clear that the law was intended to actually make them "natural born," as it only says that they would be treated as if they were natural born. Congress has no power to create natural born citizens, only to make laws pertaining to "naturalization." In other words, the verbiage in the 1790 act, which was repealed, represents a legal fiction. Lastly, citizenship would only pass from father to the child, and not through the mother, so the entire hubbub is irrelevant anyway.

[Bidimus1]

so considered citizen is not a citizen... and that depends on what is is...

there is nothing in statute sitting up 3 type of citizen

The only definition ever in law for NBC is 1790. No law after it has supplanted that definition.

The impressment may or may not be on point but it is NOT in the statute.

[Bidimus1]

So you call on the 1790 law to both bolster and refute your argument ?

the Father only part you like and the rest is out with the trash..