Theodore Dwight, Edward Dwight, Commentaries on the law of persons and personal property, pg. 125 (1894)
It is the very essence of the condition of a natural born citizen, of one who is a member of the state by birth within and under it, that his rights are not derived from the mere will of the state.
The New Englander, Vol. III, pg. 434 (1845)
A statute that proclaims someone to be a citizen by birth is an act of naturalization and, therefore, anyone who derives their citizenship from such an act is a naturalized citizen and is, therefore, not a Natural Born Citizen. If Ted Cruz bases his citizenship status off of a naturalization act, he is immediately not a NBC and is ineligible to be POTUS in accordance with article II, section I, clause 5 which states:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;
You will note that it does not say: No Person except a citizen at birth as a result of any future naturalization act, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;
The language there appears quite clear, to me.
Nothing which you just sent overwhelms it, for that portion of the Code which I'm trying to draw attention to is the most explicit.
How can explicit wording be set aside by going far afield of it?
8 U.S. Code § 1401 - Nationals and citizens of United States at birth --- is either the present law of the land in this regard, or it is not.
If it is not, it is not by merely citing to me yet other mentions of past law, and quotations from individuals regarding the laws, when we have actual Code that is quite narrowly specific as per Cruz's own particular conditions of birth.
That portion of the laws of the land would most certainly need be consulted, and then if set aside in any portion, those set-asides need be justified at each step along the way -- or else the U.S. Code produced through Representative government is near entirely worthless, and the government itself be invalidated.
Where would it end?
You wrote;
Does not say this artificial contraption of your contemporaneous devising, which contraption includes mention of "naturalization act" as something of a red herring.
Are you trying you distract me (and others too) or first and foremost yourself in order to salvage your previous statements?
Cruz is not a citizen of the United States due to himself becoming a naturalized citizen, but instead due to the clarification of the laws -- in regards to Constitutional language which we should by default assume was known to all the various 'framers' of this portion of U.S. Code -- was naturally enough by dint of birth to a U.S. citizen himself born as a citizen of the United States.
The only possible hang-up I can see which remains, is that he well enough(?) could have been born with dual citizenship.
Yet since he never has renounced his own U.S. citizenship, then from birth retained that citizenship.