That's incorrect. Birth-abroad is remarkably different from being born on US soil. There are hundreds of cases on this subject, in complete agreement.
See Thomas v. Lynch - 5th Circuit - August 7, 2015 - 14-60297, which holds US military bases abroad are not US soil.
Thomas, born at a US military base in Germany, fathered by a US citizen and serviceman, was NOT a citizen of the US.
Was Thomas’ mom American/ a US citizen?
The gist of the case was that the plaintiff argued he was a natural born citizen under the 14th Amendment. The court quite rightly ruled he was not. The court also noted that he was not a U.S. citizen at all because his father, while a naturalized citizen, did not meet the requirements defined in 8 U.S. Code Section 1401 to pass natural-born citizenship status to his son.
In Cruz's case his mother did meet the requirements outlined by law - U.S. citizen physically present in the U.S. for at least five years prior to birth, two of which were after she was fourteen - and therefore Cruz is a natural-born citizen. The two cases are not at all similar.
In the case you cited, the father, while a naturalized US citizen and an active duty service member at the time of Thomas’s birth, his father did not meet the physical presence requirement of the statute in force at the time of Thomas’s birth. If his father had met the physical present requirement or had been born a US citizen, the ruling would have been different.