[tumblindice]

The law passed five years later in 1795 begins by stating that it is “to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject” and when you get to the same wording in the 1790 act:
“And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as *natural born Citizens*: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States ...”

The 1795 Act omits the words “natural born”, to wit:

SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, that the children of persons duly naturalized, dwelling within the United States, and being under the age of twenty-one years, at the time of such naturalization, and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as *citizens* of the United States: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons ... “.

I’m going to conjecture that some sharp eyed clark in a tri-cornered hat said, “Hey, wait a second! ... we just expressly contradicted Article 2, Section 1, clause 5.”

Keep in mind that the US Constitution (clearing throat) trumps any subsequent federal or state law that clearly contradicts it, or any outrageous SCOTUS ruling.
Or any Obama executive order.

[Johnny B.]

The 1795 Act omits the words “natural born”

All that proves is that Congress does have the right to defin who is or is not a NBC.

I’m going to conjecture that some sharp eyed clark in a tri-cornered hat said, “Hey, wait a second! ... we just expressly contradicted Article 2, Section 1, clause 5.”

Oh, well, if you're going to conjecture, I guess we can put this to bed. After all, your conjectures are the ultimate authority on Constitutional Law! /s

All the Constitution says is that there are two types of Citizens (Natural-born and Naturalized) and that only Natural-born citizens can be President. That's it.

It's up to Congress to define who is or isn't a NBC. It's not up to some French author, it's not up to the Courts, and it's most definitely not up to your "conjecture".

According to the law in effect at the time, Cruz is a NBC.

[Gee Wally]

It's strange that the historical record doesn't indicate that the 3rd Congress was fixing an obvious error by the 1st Congress in the 1790 Naturalization Act. Madison, who chaired the select committee that handled the changes, wrote to Jefferson about what they changes were about, and he made no mention of the removal of the "natural born" language.

Madison letter to Jefferson

The Annals of Congress are also silent on the issue. You can read for yourself the discussion about the bill at pages 1004-1007, 1021-23, 1026-27, 1028-30, 1030-32, 1033-40, 1041-58, 1060, 1061, 1064-66:

Proceedings and Debates of the 3rd Congress

There is a comment that the select committee kept "whatever was necessary from the Old Law"

Select Committee Reports Bill

If the 3rd Congress was fixing a mistake by the 1st Congress, they apparently felt no need for discussion about it, and Jefferson didn't even give it a thought in his letter to Jefferson. On the other hand, they may simply have felt that there was no need to discuss who was considered natural born in a law about the naturalization process.