The Supreme Court in 1898 used the term to describe the citizen status of 'native born' instead of 'natural born' for a good reason, and to cite a key clause in the 14th Amendment with the meaning of “Not owing allegiance to anybody else.” Because of this clause in the 14th Amendment they withheld bestowing natural born citizen on Wong Ark because of his ties to the Empire of China through his alien parents. Therefore, they gave a narrow ruling, for which Wong Ark could never be president of the United States.
“The Supreme Court in 1898 used the term to describe the citizen status of ‘native born’ instead of ‘natural born’ for a good reason, and to cite a key clause in the 14th Amendment with the meaning of ‘Not owing allegiance to anybody else.’”
You must be refering to the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause. Nothing about the clause in itself implies that children born on American soil to parents with foreign allegiances are not natural born citizens. You’d have to find language to such an effect somewhere else in the Constitution. Since the 14th amendment is the only place in the Constitution that defines citizenship, and since the presidential qualifications clause does not define “natural born citizen” as seperate from the people born as citizens in the 14th amendment, I still see no reason why Wong, Elg, or Obama aren’t qualified to be president.
I’ve read a quote either on this thread or somewhere else that said, “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” Be that as it may, such language is not in the 14th amendment. In fact, I have not read such language anywhere in the Constitution, in federal law, or in case law. Language baring citizens with “parents...owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty” from being president simply does not exist, so far as I know.
“Because of this clause in the 14th Amendment they withheld bestowing natural born citizen on Wong Ark because of his ties to the Empire of China through his alien parents.”
Where do you get that? I have seen no evidence that they used the term “native born” instead of “natural born” because they consciously decided Wong was a citizen but not elligible to be president. They granted Wong Ark citizenship under the 14th amendment because of where he was born, which makes him both a natural born and a native born citizen. I have searched and searched the internet, and could find no reliable source to tell me that there is a difference between “native born” and “natural born,” because those terms mean the same thing, i.e. citizen by birth (via “the right of soil”).
“The Supreme Court in 1898 used the term to describe the citizen status of ‘native born’ instead of ‘natural born’ for a good reason, and to cite a key clause in the 14th Amendment with the meaning of ‘Not owing allegiance to anybody else.’”
I think I just noticed a logical problem. If, as you argue, the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause requires that a child’s parents not owe allegiance to another country, why would the court decide that Wong Ark was a U.S. citizen? That is to say, how do you exclude Wong Ark from being president using text from the 14th amendment when the exact same text was used to give citizenship?
If the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause did not keep him from being a citizen, then how could it keep him from being president? Again, no part of the Constitution offers a different definition of natural born citizen than the definition of a “native” born citizen offered under the 14th amendment.