Now you just have to show me where U.S. law specifies that naturalization law covers one who is a U.S. citizens at birth.
Why would you ask me to show you what you know already exists?
One need only be born a U.S. citizen under U.S. law (which should always be in accordance with natural law) to be a natural born citizen.
What US law in particular are you talking about?
What U.S. law am I talking about? ALL U.S. law concerning granting citizenship at birth - of course.
What U.S law are you talking about anyway?
“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that
“No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President, and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus, new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
So where does U.S. law contradict the above and state that naturalization covers those who are U.S. citizens at birth?
Don't try to weasel out of it.
According to the founders and the law of 1790 - a child born to U.S. citizens while they are in France is a natural born citizen of America.
So native born isn't a subset or category of U.S. citizenship. Marco Rubio is then - according to you - a U.S. citizen at birth - a “native born” citizen - and yet somehow NOT a natural born citizen - but a naturalized citizen.
Under what provision of U.S. law was Marco Rubio naturalized under?