No. The Constitution gives Congress the power to establish uniform rules of "naturalisation." This *necessarily* excludes "natural born" from the equation because per comm and natural law, someone who is "natural born" is "naturally" a citizen, there is no need for statutory law to define the status and quality of their citizenship.
Long story short - if your citizenship is derived from meeting a qualification specified in a law passed by Congress (as Cruz's is), then you are by definition not a natural born citizen.
Long story short - if your citizenship is derived from meeting a qualification specified in a law passed by Congress (as Cruz’s is), then you are by definition not a natural born citizen.
That much you can bet on.
Yup every time someone starts the discussion by invoking a statute or act of Congress, they’ve already admitted that he’s not a natural born citizen.
All of those arguing that Cruz is not a natural born citizen are wrong.
Many, such as Alan Grayson, are knowingly lying to try to undermine the best candidate in the race.
Ted Cruz clearly meets all the Constitutional requirements and existing statues defining natural born citizenship.
Congress, in conjunction with the President and the Courts have consistently defined Natural Born citizenship and it includes anyone born to a United States Citizen of majority age who meets the criteria defined by Congress in the laws cited above.
All the semantic parsing of Natural Born verses Naturalized at birth of a person born to a citizen of the United States, even beyond its borders, in no way meets the intent of the Founders that whomever is elected President of the United States be a loyal citizen, born into the tradition of Freedom of this great nation.
Ted Cruz is clearly qualified. Now try to defeat the merits of his arguments on the field of ideas.