You, are the one who is confused.
Lawyers use negatives to drive out ambiguity. NO person ....who shall NOT HAVE attained...
When you clearly state what a person cannot be, you are left with a clear picture of what that person is.
When you craft a statement with positives, you open up the possibilities of questions and “yeah buts”
natural born Citizen.
One who is born a Citizen.
If one is born of two Canada citizen parents, how do you attach German or Polish Citizenship to the child??? You cannot.
If one is born on Canada soil, can that child be a citizen of Paraguay? How?? Who determines?
Name a Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidate who was declared ineligible. And then cite a Supreme Court decision that addressed the Natural Born Citizen clause as it applies to the election of the President. And, Minor v. Heppersett is not such a case. That case was about Women’s Suffrage. Have you read it?