[ Problem is that the 1790 act stipulates “parents†plural, which would not apply to Cruz. The notion that one parent, and especially the mother, passes on natural born citizenship is a much later innovation that wasn’t around at the time of the Founders. ]
Problem is if you are citing the 1790 act (not in the constitution but a bill and not an amendment either) then aren’t you also acknowledging that all subsequent acts supersede it and according to the 1952 act Cruz is eligible?
A 22 year old shall be considered as a child (this is REAL US regulation, today, right now)
The various laws through the years give insight into what NBC actually meant to the framers of the Constitution, but particularly those of 1790 and 1795 because they had many members of the Constitutional Convention also in Congress, and George Washington, the president who signed those laws, was also the president of the Constitutional Convention. So, THEIR understanding of what was meant by the founders when they wrote “NBC” central and decisive.
So, IF later Congresses MISUNDERSTOOD the meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” and are writing constitutionally questionable laws if applied to presidential qualifications, then the Supreme Court could be called upon to answer the question.