U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause

[Minimalist]

Regardless, it is there and whether or not it should or should not be is irrelevant.

the 1844 case of Lynch v. Clarke
held that parental citizenship was not significant in that Julia Lynch, born in New York while her British parents were visiting the US was a "natural-born" US citizen in spite of the fact that both she and her parents left the US soon after her birth and never returned.

In the course of the decision, the court cited the Constitutional provision and said:

Suppose a person should be elected president who was native born, but of alien parents; could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the Constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor, that by the rule of the common law, in force when the Constitution was adopted, he is a citizen.[48]

And further:

Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen. It is surprising that there has been no judicial decision upon this question.[49]

The decision in Lynch was cited as persuasive or authoritative precedent in numerous subsequent cases, and reinforced the interpretation that "natural born citizen" meant born "within the dominions and allegiance of the United States" regardless of parental citizenship.

So, and this is bound to piss off the birthers, Obama who was born in Hawaii would be "natural-born" even if both his parents had been Kenyans while Cruz, born in Canada, would have some problem.