Knowing the basis for any of the “doubts” the court referred to would certainly be helpful. However, that discussion itself recognizes the basis for the highest form of citizenship.
On what basis could one conclude the founders did not intend the highest form relative to the two highest offices, and only those two, in the entire government scheme.
As I wrote to my state politician regarding an impotent eligibility bill:
It is possible pursuant to this bill that a candidate born in the U.S. of two visiting foreign citizen parents could have immediately returned to his parent’s native country and remained there for all but the past 14 years. That country may not be an ally of the U.S., the candidate would have received much or all of his schooling there and perhaps even served in that country’s government or armed services.
That sounds the opposite of what the founders would have had in mind for our president and vp..
Ironic that barry is usurping the Presidency in the same fashion as pregnant illegal aliens do when they run across our border to give birth. He bases his Presidential eligibility solely on being physically within U.S. borders at the moment of birth regardless of the citizenship of his parents.
Which is why:
A) he desperately needs to maintain that he was born in Hawaii
and
B) he desperately needs to distract attention from the fact that his father’s British citizenship at the time of his birth makes him most definitely not natural born in the Constitutional sense, except for the above-cited vague precedents surrounding the meaning of natural born versus born on U.S. soil regardless of parentage (something to research)
and
C) once the Constitutional meaning of natural born breaks wide open in the media there will be a general outcry for an original copy of his birth certificate to prove that he was born in Hawaii, at which time he will resign because undoubtedly there is something incriminating about it.