This article states in its second paragraph:
"Perhaps the first most important thing to understand about national birthright is that there was no written national birthright rule until the year 1866. One will look in vain to find any national law on the subject prior to this year, or even any mention of the right to citizenship by birth under the United States Constitution."
Perhaps I misunderstand the meaning of the author regarding "national birthright rule" or "national law"; when I take it as a reference to a definition of who is a citizen at birth, but wouldn't these count?
1790 First Congress, Act of March 26th, 1790, 1 Stat. 103.
"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States".
1795 Act of January 29, 1795. Section 3, 1 Stat. 414, 415. (Same general provisions as above).
1802 Act of April 14, 1802. Section 4, 2 Stat. 153, 144. (Same general provisions as above).
1855 Act of February 10, 1855. Section 1, 10 Stat. 604.
"All children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States; but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States."
Thank you for your response, calenel. Looks like I’m getting back into FR gradually today/tomorrow, after directing attention elsewhere.
I believe that Donofrio relates that this Act specifically removes "natural" or "natural born" from its confering of citizenship upon the bases it declares -- and that it never returns to any conferring of citiznship that is weaker than the Article 2 presidential standard.