Wong Kim Ark’s ruling was a matter of Statutory law: Congress at the time declined to confer citizenship at birth to children of citizens living overseas. But that didn’t mean that had they conferred citizenship, those children wouldn’t be considered natural-born citizens. The 1906 Dept. of State doubtlessly followed such statutory law, not the repealed 1790 law.
The 1795 law in no way redefines “natural born,” refers to any citizen at birth as “naturalized,” nor denies “natural born” status to anyone born a citizen. Nowhere in any statutory or case law is there any reference to anyone born a citizen being “naturalized.”
I didn't say it redefined it, I said it eliminated it
---
nor denies 'natural born' status to anyone born a citizen.
I never said it did that, either, I said with few exceptions, it LIMITED the amount of time natural born children could be born out of the jurisdiction of the United States.
---
Now I'll be happy to discuss anything I HAVE said, but discussing something you've decided I've said when I actually haven't is a waste of time.