Why not?
Why not?
Because if they could redefine terms in the Constitution, they could in effect amend it without going through the amendment process. They could redefine "arms" or "freedom of the press" or "freedom of speech", or "unreasonable". Much mischief would ensue as they could and would gut the bill of rights.
No delgated power. At least I don't see one. They can define a uniform rule for naturalization, and they have. But no power to define "natural born citizen" or any other Constitutional "term of art" for that matter.