The Supreme Court has done that before, in 1898 when it ruled that a man was a natural born U.S. citizen regardless of his parent's nationality. And the Constitution does not take Jus Sanguinis into account for anything except treason. Donofrio is going way against established precedent in his line of reasoning, and ignoring federal law and the Constitution as well. Which is why I believe the Supreme Court will not take his case up.
Under my SPECIFIC interpretation of “natural born” citizen, OBAMA WOULD NOT be eligible to be POTUS. He DOES NOT meet BOTH requirements.
We do not operate under your interpretation or my interpretation. The only interpretation that matters in the Supreme Court's, and they've already spoken on the subject. I can't see anything that would cause them to reconsider the earlier court's decision.
“The Supreme Court has done that before, in 1898 when it ruled that a man was a natural born U.S. citizen regardless of his parent’s nationality.”
Ah yes ... United States v. Wong Kim Ark ...
READ the decision ...
SCOTUS ruled that he was a “citizen” - NOT “natural born citizen” and it was ENTIRELY correct, per interpretation of the 14th Amendment.
YOU are interpreting that to mean “natural born citizen” ...
As far as my SPECIFIC interpretation, yes ... it is my opinion, STRONGLY supported by Blackstone and Vatel - whom the Founding Fathers relied upoun heavily when formulating law.
BTW: Under your interpretation, a child of Hitler during WWII, born on U.S. soil would be a “natural born” citizen ... that is NOT the case - look it up ...