Their interpretation isn't "originalist" or "strict" at all. It's just what they want to say, at any given moment. History would be very different if both of your parents had to be US citizens. The president of the US is required to be a "natural born citizen"

Of the 45[a] individuals who became president, there have been eight that had at least one parent who was not born on U.S. soil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_(United_States)

For one, Donald Trump might not be president because his mother was born in Scotland.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/donald-trumps-immigrant-mother

For those (uninformed) Trump supporters who claim she was a citizen when little Donny was born, that's true but her immigration process was much easier than it is today. This is it, in its entirety:

On May 2, MacLeod left Glasgow on board the RMS Transylvania arriving in New York City on May 11 (one day after her 18th birthday). She declared she intended to become a U.S. citizen and would be staying permanently in America.

Though the 1940 census form filed by Mary Anne and her husband, Fred Trump, stated that she was a naturalized citizen, she did not actually become one until March 10, 1942.[1][6][7] However, there is no evidence that she violated any immigration laws prior to her naturalization, as she frequently traveled internationally and was afterwards able to re-enter the U.S.

[She] became a naturalized citizen in March 1942

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Anne_MacLeod_Trump

They must be using the Constitution that Trump was selling that was missing the 11th-27th amendments.

They ignored the 14th for the Dobbs decision. This is right in line with current SCOTUS jurisprudence.

Illegitimate SCOTUS.

The 13th amendment says that slavery's abolished
Look at all these slave masters posing on your dollar

https://youtu.be/32hUIGnMpOY

Technically it just redefined slavery, but I know what you mean.

There's a special irony in relying on Clarence Thomas to vet your Dred Scott decision to try and deny a poc a place on the ballot.

They’re kinda forgetting about the whole 14th Amendment thing

Modern conservatives can and do argue that the 14th Amendment isn't valid because of the post-Civil War state of martial law. But then they'll argue that the original secession was legal, because there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't secede. But also, there's penumbral rights afforded specifically to white Christian men. But then also, the 17th and 19th amendments don't count, because idfk something about the color of the fringe on the flag or some dumb confused legalistic bullshit.

It's all Calvinball. The end game of any purely legalist institution is just layer after layer of silly interpretations stacked to the upper atmosphere, with a bunch of old grouchy know-it-alls yelling "Stop breaking the law!" from behind it all.

have found that a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ is defined as a person born on American soil of parents who are both citizens of the United States at the time of the child’s birth

Jack shit has found this to be the case lmao. The parents don't have to have citizenship. Every day, immigrants with green cards from all over the world are giving birth on US soil to US citizens.

Plus, if we follow this group's logic, most people would not be US citizens, because of how many people trace their lineage to immigrants. Alito, Scalia, and Thomas would thus not be citizens by their logic, and if that's the case, why are/were they even permitted on SCOTUS?

Republicans have truly scraped the bottom of the barrel at this point. In a sense we're blessed that such hateful people are such sheer idiots.

It also brings up an interesting point though -- why hasn't this Supreme Court, which is prolific in overturning past precedents, not vacated the Dred Scott decision yet? Curious, isn't it?