The link provides proof that native-born and natural-born are different subsets of citizen. They are not the same.
No, it did not. Using “native-born or natural-born citizen” in a regulation does NOT mean the terms have separate definitions. It merely means both were in common use, as here:
“But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg “solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.” The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U. S. 227), declared Miss Elg “to be a natural born citizen of the United States,” and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants.”
Aren’t there freepers who can access the “way-back” postings?