Sure lots if very iffy cases pointed to. From your list only Wong Kim Ark is directly germane.
Prior to Suffrage, the mother could not pass on NBC, only the father. Following Suffrage that was changed and the mother can pass on NBC, as in Cruz.
No single parent can pass on natural born citizenship. It takes two. Trust Barack Obama, who told you he was born “Subject of the British Commonwealth” because his citizenship followed his father's, even with a U.S. citizen Mother. He told you he was naturalized. Only an amendment can change that requirement since Congress has no authority to interpret the Constitution. Also, no amendment can infer or imply a change in an existing provision of the Constitution. Changes must be explicit. The foundation for our naturalization laws is the 14th Amendment in which the term natural born citizen does not appear, and whose author, John Bingham, repeated Vattel’s definition in his House hearings.
Congress cannot amend Natural Law. As Diogenes explained with excellent examples, Greeks had no confusion about which citizens were natural born. Natural born citizenship has thousands of years of practical application. We could perhaps invent a "progressive citizen", with a scale to determine who is accorded the highest status. I'll leave the requirements to your imagination. But suffrage has nothing to do with natural born citizenship.
No, there was a schism which developed. Never before in History was a child born to (married) parents of different allegiances. Both England and the US recognized automatic naturalization for a woman married to a citizen/subject.
The dichotomy didn't occur at "suffrage" it occurred with the Cable act of 1922. Suffrage didn't allow the transfer of citizenship, but the Cable act of 1922 did.
It wasn't "Natural" citizenship, it was a bastardized form of citizenship which never existed before. A split citizenship with multiple possible allegiances where before their only existed one.