Duh. People do it all the time. Someone born on US soil to a citizen and a legally resident non-citizen is a citizen by right of birth (aka "natural-born citizen").
“Duh. People do it all the time. Someone born on US soil to a citizen and a legally resident non-citizen is a citizen by right of birth (aka “natural-born citizen”).”
******************
IMO, that is not what is meant by Natural Born Citizen. This is the problem. The only use of Natural Born Citizen is to differentiate a requirement for President and Vice President. I think it is clear using Vattel and the example of Chester Arthur that a person with 1 US citizen parent is not a Natural Born Citizen.
There is no “Duh” about this. Eventually the SCOTUS will need to clarify this phrase. But using the term how it was used makes the most sense from a historical perspective. It also makes the most sense if one wants to preserve the Republic and Constitution.
AKA, an assumption. Never adjudicated. But as far as being a citizen by birth, neither parent need be a US citizen. (Nor, AFAIK, even a legal resident) at least according to several adjudications. Wong Kim Ark, for example, who was the child of two aliens, although lawfully in the country.
BTW, BHO Sr was not a resident, he was a foreign student, a nonresident alien for immigration purposes. He was (probably) legally present in the US, but he was not a resident.