“The “rules of naturalization†means:
1) who is a citizen at birth (naturally born)
2) who is not a citizen and must be naturalized
If you don’t like that, then change the constitution.”
This is how I’ve always understood it as well. For example, I have a daughter who was born in the Philippines. I’m a U.S. citizen, my wife is a dual citizen of both the U.S. and the Philippines. My daughter, though not born on U.S. soil, did not have to be naturalized. All we had to do was apply for a U.S. passport to “claim” her citizenship, and to accomplish this, we were only required to show that ONE of her parents (we chose me since I was born in the U.S.) is a U.S. citizen. Now my understanding is that my daughter is “natural born”, since she was never required to go through the naturalization process. Unless I’m missing something, it would seem that the same criteria would apply to Cruz.
The Children of Naturalized Aliens also do not have to go through a "process." The lack of a "process" does not make them any less naturalized than their parents.
The concept in law is called "Derivative citizenship." The citizenship of the children becomes derived from the Naturalized Parent.
The term natural born citizen is only mentioned in the qualifications to be President and Vice-President. It doesn’t apply to Congress, Judges, Governors nor anyone else. My wife used to be a Mexican citizen. She renounced her former citizenship when she was naturalized. I witnessed the ceremony and explained all of this too her in advance.
The U.S. Code is the law, not the Constitution. Your daughter would only be a natural born citizen if your wife was naturalized prior to her birth. Your wife cannot be a dual citizen if she was naturalized, because she would have renounced her former citizenship.