Hold on, Robert, it may be too early for you to throw in the towel.
Neal Katyal was an O appointee to the OSG, so we should not be surprised to learn which side of the issue he is inclined to argue.
Paul Clement, who appears to have an excellent Republican history, was a Bush appointee - and held a top place on presidential candidate McCain's USSC appointment list. Clement is expected to also hold a top place on the Cruz and Rubio lists.
A quick read reveals the U.S. authority for much of the argument Katyal and Clement make is based on birth abroad to two parents. Most telling is that it does not address the constitutional status of either the child who happened to be born a few feet into our country to two illegal parents, or to one who holds a foreign birth certificate and a foreign parent.
Of course, it may just be Clement wishes to help save our nation from Hillary and, willing to overlook any critical legal analysis, supports Cruz or Rubio as an expedient.
On the other hand, the legal argument presented above could be considered as a show of loyalty to two of the top-tier candidates who have troublesome citizenship by an author who would welcome a USSC appointment.
P> The USSC early-on held that whatever one's view of NBC happens to be, its highest form would be birth within the country to two parents.
My question for Clement would be on what basis does he determine the founders intended by their express use of NBC - only in the case of the highest office in the land that of Commander-in-Chief - that foreign birth to a foreign parent would suffice?
Clement, with his fine legal abilities, would quickly recognize what controls is not the view of others then or now, but what usage the founders intended.
thanks, and my real reason for posting this was to see if this can actually put the issue to rest or not. I think the consensus tells me that it is not. Ted Cruz needs to get clarification and now. As far as I am concerned Marco Rubio needs to drop out immediately due to ineligibility.