[DJ MacWoW]

Now, one could argue that the definition of “natural born” has to be governed by the law prevailing at the time. I doubt any court will agree, and prefer the law prevailing at the time it was constitutionally relevant, i.e., 2008.

Sure. The Constitution is now toilet paper, right?

[buwaya]

The constitution is what a court decides it is - thats in the constitution. Another court can overrule the first court. Thats been going on for 200 years, and the mass of elaboration on various bits of the constitution is, by now, tremendous.

US courts have been tearing up the constitution by somebodies’ definition since they started deciding constitutional questions - there are two sides to all of these, and half of them lost.

You can argue simplistically like this, but that doesn’t make the argument relevant. Its just a fact that a court in this day would find against you.