[El Gato]

The issue here is that he entitled to the benefits of current law or the older, whichever is more beneficial to him, unless specifically denied by a new, now current, law.

The law did specifically deny retroactivity, it only applied to people born on or after November 14, 1986, To be a citizen, if born outside the country, his mother would have needed to be at least 19 years old. She was not. (the US Citizen parent needed to have lived the country 10 years, 5 of which had to be after their 14th birthday, as opposed to 5 and 2 years in the current law).

Again, that's to be a citizen, which is not the same as a natural born citizen.

BTW, the section of the US Code is Title 8,CHAPTER 12,SUBCHAPTER III, section 1401 The law which changed the residency requirements in 1986 stated: “The amendment made by section 12 shall apply to persons born on or after November 14, 1986.”

[mlo]

"Again, that's to be a citizen, which is not the same as a natural born citizen."

A citizen at birth and a natural born citizen are the same thing. See the cites I just posted.