There is a very well organized scheme in place to remove the NBC clause either through neglect or misrepresentation. it is trivially easy to ignore or misrepresent the relevant case law. That's what courts are for.
“FWIW, when SCOTUS has viewed the 1790 Act in retrospect, it views it as a naturalization act, not a definition”
That is completely false.
The law is not so narrowly compartmentalized as you imagine.
The law is not pigeon-holed that way.
A law can have wide-ranging effect.
A law dealing with salvage rights at the bottom of the ocean can affect how the company’s taxes are calculated, how the company reports to the SEC and the stock market, and the inheritance rights of the owners.
Laws are not so confined to one topic or another as you fantasize.
“The argument that it is a definition was floated by globalists,”
It doesn’t matter who raises an argument.
It only matters what is TRUE.
You see there is this thing I like to all THE REAL WORLD.
And there is this inner fantasy life that you may be familiar with.
There is a difference. You might want to look into that.
But there is a concept called
THE TRUTH.
And it is an ad hominem argument — an admission you cannot defend your position — to attack WHO raised an argument instead of considering the truth or falsehood of the argument.