A distinction that was not raised in the Collins article that Donofrio is trumpeting. According to Collins, if your father was not a U.S. citizen then you don't qualify for any kind of citizenship, natural-born or otherwise. It was that position that the Ark case clearly repudiated.
But the Ark decision also ruled that children born in the U.S. are citizens at birth, a status clearly distinct from naturalized citizen. Since the Constitution identifies only two forms of citizenship then citizen by birth, citizen at birth, and natural-born citizen are all synonymous.
The 1939 case of Perkins Vs. ELG shows who can be a natural born citizen, while the 1898, Wong Kim Ark vs. U.S. defines a “native born citizen”. Some people get confused between native born citizen versus natural born citizen. The Supreme Court did not interchange the terms because they do not have the same meaning. If they did, then Ark would be a Natural Born citizen.
(I stole that from RS - thanks)