To answer your questions: my son’s cttizenship derives from conditionalities established by statute, just as naturalization is governed by statute. Both these are distinguished from natural born citizenship as that form of citizenship is seen as the natural and inalienable consequence of the circumstances of birth. It depends on no statute an in fact can be thought of a preceeding the establishment of any state or goverment.
But I think that he can not be cosidered naturalized as there was no different citizenship from which he was converted or naturalized a a citizen of the US. He has never been a citizen of any other State or Nation.
The pamphlet (which I very much wish I still had among my papers) did not say he was considered naturalized, only that he could not be considered natural born, and would not be considered eligible for the Presidency.
The time I spent out of the country was not relevant.
From your reply:
“..... But I think that he can not be cosidered naturalized as there was no different citizenship from which he was converted or naturalized a a citizen of the US. He has never been a citizen of any other State or Nation.
The pamphlet (which I very much wish I still had among my papers) did not say he was considered naturalized,only that he could not be considered natural born,and would not be considered eligible for the Presidency. ...”
Many many thanks for the info!
It fits what I have been thinking all throughout this many-year discussion about “natural born citizen” ...
a “natural born citizen” doesn’t need to look up the ‘definition’ in a statute somewhere, and/or see if his or her circumstances of birth are addressed in said statute.