[El Sordo]

I am saying that the term “Native-Born” is not used consistently across the INS interpretations and the documents Leo cites cannot then be reliably taken to mean what he says they mean.

As Thomas Sowell likes to say, it's an “AH-HA!” moment.

But I don't think it neccesarilys hold up under scrutiny.

Anyhow, I am only posting exactly what is written in the INS statutory interpretations. The links are all there for full context.

[frog in a pot]

Ok, thank you. I appreciate your response and concede you may be correct vis a vis usage of the term “native-born”.

But again, what bearing can any inconsistent usage of one classification have on an entirely separate classificiation of citizenship? Are you be saying that contamination of one can necessarily contaminate another separate entity?

Let me posit this for consideration: What is the distinguishing difference in the presumed governmental definitions of native- and natural born citizenship?

Thank you for any response: will get back to you later, I am running out the door.