Please provide the relevant section of the US Constitution that proves your point about the definition for Natural Born?
SoConPubbie, you have been at FR long enough to have heard this dozens of times, and perhaps even read Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny with Madison's explanation for why there are not definitions in the Constitution. Language change over time so our framers explicitly left definitions to our common-law and language at the time of the framers.
"If you are unable to do that, please provide the relevant US Law passed by Congress and signed by a US President that provides the necessary justification for your position/definition for Natural Born."
Again SoCal, Obama has caused most of us, not lawyers, to learn that separation of powers prevents Congress from passing any law that alters or interprets an article of the Constitution. There was only one such law, the Naturalization Act of the 1st Congress in 1790, the act about which Mark Levin was patently wrong when he opined on Hannity that it ended discussion of whether Cruz was eligible. The 1790 Act was entirely repealed in 1795, signed by Washington, and mention of natural born citizen removed forever from U.S. Code. Only the Supreme Court could have extended the Marshall/Vattel common-law, and they haven't - yet. Obama and his campaign co-chair McCaskill tried, with Senate Bill 2678, the ‘‘Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act”, in February 2008, but it failed to pass, let alone be designated an amendment.
"Barring that, please provide the relevant US Supreme Court case ruling that provides the necessary justification for your position/definition for Natural Born."
That one is easy SoCon, though Soro’s acolytes did their best to hide it by mucking up the reference specification in some twenty five Supreme Court cases citing Minor v. Happersett on the most accessed legal web site, Justia.com, founded by Center for American Progress fellow Tim Stanley, and at Cornell Law by Center for American Progress CIO, Karl Malamud. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, (1875):
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.