— Why define it if born overseas and not if born in country. — There was no question that a child born of two citizens, in country, is a natural born citizen. And at the time, there were MANY examples of people born in the country to non-citizens, and those people were NOT citizens.
Think about what you just said. It hinges on the definition of citizen. They defined it in the first part of the act..and an alien could be a citizen.
So born of two citizens..not necessarily two natural born citizens.
If that is the interpretation that SCOTUS chooses then Obamanazi could not be a natural born citizen as his father was not a citzen but a child born of two aliens who have become citizens could be President whether or not born on US soil.
An alien could become a citizen, via naturalization. True then, true now.
-- So born of two citizens..not necessarily two natural born citizens. --
That's right. A child of two naturalized citizens becomes a member of the first generation of natural born citizens. My resistance is to the notion that a person born on US soil is a natural born citizen, even if that child is the son of non-citizens.
-- bamanazi could not be a natural born citizen as his father was not a citzen but a child born of two aliens who have become citizens could be President whether or not born on US soil. --
The child is born of two naturalized citizens, that is, born of citizens. There is no mixed allegiance in the family unit, as between parent(s) and child.