The Constitution is not modified by an act of Congress, that is the hurdle that so many can’t seem to grasp, and that’s sort of scary on a site such as this one. The term natural-born citizen clearly meant an individual under the sole jurisdiction of the United States. All the debate about parent or parents is due to jurisdiction, all the debate about born in or out of the country is due to jurisdiction. It seems to me that individuals born outside of the country can be natural-born citizens, if the country in which they were born does not make a citizenship claim on the basis of their being born there. It also seems to me that individuals born in this country to noncitizen parent or parents can be natural-born citizens if the country of their parent(s) does not make a citizenship claim on the basis of descent. This is the “doubt” that is referenced in Minor v. Happersett. Such doubt can be resolved in favor of a given candidate, or it can be resolved in a manner not in their favor.
Exactly! And that is why the 14th Amendment says born or naturalized. The 1965 Act specifically states that children born to aliens in the US are themselves aliens at birth. This Act of Congress, this legislation that upheld the 14th Amendment, was the legislation in force when both Rubio & Cruz were born and that legislation says that both Rubio & Cruz are naturalized citizens.
We may not like the laws, however, as Justice Scalia impressed upon his readers, Scalia quoting Blackstone, said, “Law, without equity, though hard and disagreeable, is much more desirable for the public good, than equity without law: which would make every judge a legislator, and introduce most infinite confusion.”