As you know, that's a different question and contention from the one I replied to earlier, which was your "You're either a natural born citizen or naturalized. Cruz isn't naturalized." I was merely providing case law context that applies to that pair of contentions.
Thanks for your reply; I was looking for how your thinking applied to Cruz.
I think you are saying that someone can be a citizen from birth, not naturalized or a citizen from birth and naturalized. There would then be a third category: naturalized after birth.
I think you are still ending up with a *category* of citizenship that does not exist. There’s not born citizen and born naturalized citizen.
However, there are two *ways” a person can be born a citizen. From my previous link:
A person may derive citizenship from birth in one of two ways:
1. Birth in the United States
2. Birth outside the United States to a U.S. citizen parent(s)
But in either case they are born citizens - not requiring a naturalization process at a later time.
The constitution gives congress the power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization. This has always applied to those who are *not* citizens by birth - who do not need to be naturalized. So the idea of a citzen who is “naturalized at birth” is a non sequitur.
Thanks again for your reply.