The 14th amendment defines who becomes a citizen of the US at birth, and then derivatively becomes a citizen of the state wherein they are born. The authors of the 14th amendment, Sen. Howard and Rep. Bingham were very careful to explain that this did not neccesarily mean they were natural born citizens, even if they were 14th amendment citizens. Sen Trumball, who was head of the Judiciary commitee also said the same thing.
A reading of the plain text of the 14th amendment does not reveal any modification to the NBC requirement in Article II.
I'm not sure the state citizenship is derivative of the US citizenship. I think they exist side by side. But no matter, they both exist, on that we agree.
-- A reading of the plain text of the 14th amendment does not reveal any modification to the NBC requirement in Article II. --
I agree with that too. One can get there by breaking down who is a citizen by operation of the 14th amendment, and comparing it with who is a citizen by operation of Article IV.
Cruz isn't a citizen by Article IV, and he isn't a citizen by operation of "born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction," so by elimination, he has to be a citizen by dint of Congress's power to naturalize by statute.
The pieces fit - Cruz's citizenship is defined in a statute, Congress has the power to make rules of naturalization (even rules of naturalization that don't impose going though a naturalization process), so there is no constitutional impediment to Cruz's citizenship.
I'd add that if the statute wasn't in place, if the only place we could look to for a definition of all kinds of US citizenship is the constitution, then Cruz is not a citizen of the US. He can become a citizen by rule of naturalization, any rule that Congress creates (that fits the circumstances of Cruz's birth) will do the trick.
The question of NBC status to native-born persons is completely different from the analysis of NBC status to persons born abroad.
Talking about NBC status of the native-born is off topic. So, briefly, the issue in the native-born cases turns on the construction of "subject to the jurisdiction." That is a whole 'nother and different can of worms. Wong Kim Ark, Plyler v. Doe FN 10 are the convenient precedents to start debate from.