[Robert DeLong]

I am not disputing his citizenship, but he is not a Natural Born Citizen Jim. If you use common sense, the founders never intended for a citizen to be considered a Natural Born Citizen whose parents had not been citizens at the time of their child's birth. However, they had a quandary to deal with. That being no one 35 or older had been born into the United States . So, they used the the term Natural Born Citizen to further qualify the citizen. Anyone born to non citizens and deemed to be citizens to non citizen parents are recognized as a form of naturalized citizens, but not Natural Citizens.

Listen Jim, if you insist on your interpretation, this nation might as well be gone, because you are opening the nation to real danger by limiting it to just born here as the qualification.

Those people born here to parents who have not yet become citizens, were always naturalized along with their parents. Once the parents became citizens, their children were Natural Born Citizens.

Nothing I can say will make you change your mind, but I am very sure that the Founding Fathers of this nation would be quite upset that are definition of NBC has become so lax as to be worthless. We might as just as well allow anyone who is in this country to become President regardless of their status, because that is exactly what you are advocating for, I why I adamantly disagree with you.

[Jim W N]

Original understanding of constitutional ambiguity comes from a good-faith research into what NBC meant at the time of ratification, not what the understanding in 2024.

Apparently the Ark Court didn’t agree with your assessment of the original understanding of NBC.

If you can cite a part of the opinion that you can specifically challenge as not original understanding with supporting evidence. I’d love to hear it.

Nevertheless, the Ark opinion is the Law of Land according to the U.S. Constitution, Art. IV, Sec. 4, and, thus, Vivek is legally an NBC.