What is fact is that our Founders based their opinions, and therefore their efforts on behalf of our laws, upon those opinions of the Natural law thinkers. (John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property.)
Not the British Version. (Natural law = Permanent Allegiance to the King who rules by divine right.)
You have, of course, a right to hold this opinion.
I have an opinion I consider more determinitive, that of a 6-2 decision of the Supreme Court. They disagreed with you.
The Constitution ... In this as in other respects, ... must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution. ... The language of the Constitution, as has been well said, could not be understood without reference to the common law.
The two dissenters agreed with you as to the inapplicability of common law in this regard, but were outvoted.
I thought this comment in the dissent particularly interesting in regard to the Cruz case, since it specifically uses NBC term.
In my judgment, the children of our citizens born abroad were always natural-born citizens from the standpoint of this Government.
This principle would make Cruz NBC, assuming the justice means one citizen parent rather than two, and that he intended this to apply to a citizen mother as well as to a citizen father, both of which are rather large assumptions.
I also found if very interesting that the dissenters believed that the President and Congress can essentially override an Amendment of the Constitution (14A) by treaty, a principle I think we will agree is very dangerous.