Citizen by statute means that we confer citizenship by law as opposed to citizenship by natural allegiance. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE doubts that anyone born of two parents who are citizens INSIDE the country in which both parents are citizens is NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. No law is needed to establish this person’s citizenship BECAUSE it occurs by a natural process. But, there are obviously circumstances that need statutory language to clear up ambiguities should they occur. Say a person is born in Britain to a mother who is American, and a father who is English? The child, depending on English law could be English, and in actual fact is, but also could be American, and in actual fact is also. But these facts are established by laws, not by natural means. Suppose America disallowed dual citizenship, or England likewise disallowed dual citizenship, or England required that the child’s citizenship be that of the father.. or mother.. or that America required the child be born in country.. These are the simple problems. There are many more complicated problems. The basic point is this: Laws are needed when there is any circumstance that exists without the natural manifestation of citizenship.
True. But where is it defined that that is the only definition of natural born citizen?
But these facts are established by laws, not by natural means.
But if Congress is empowered by the Constitution to establish rules of naturalization then wouldn't it mean that they must also establish, by law, who does not need to be naturalized? And since the Constitution identifies only two forms of citizenship then if you are not naturalized then you must be, by default, natural-born.