If the Founders would not have considered Cruz a Natural Born Citizen, then why did the same people who wrote the Constitution include in the very first law concerning citizenship a statement that the children of citizens born outside of the country were "natural born citizens".
The one early reference to Natural born from 1790 Nat Act is as a COMPARATIVE between the children of Naturalized Citizens, the folks the 1790 Act was concerned with, and the children of Natural Born Citizens.
The children of both groups would be considered “Citizens”.
The Founders WOULD NOT consider NBC to refer to a person born of one citizen parent, one foreigner AND born outside the country.
It would make no sense to have the unique Natural Born language if it did not delineate a unique status.
It was put there as a last bulwark to PROTECT the country from voters making big mistakes, like blindly electing a NON NBC like Obozo!!!
The popularly elected Senate, a bastardization of the constitution, wasn’t able to protect The People on this because of their concerns for re-election.
Well mainly because they didn't do that.
The entire thing is nonsense. If one went out-of-country in that day, the trip would likely take months. It cannot have been infrequent that a child was born out of country - to include ship-born which would be under the flag of the ship. Of course it has always been so that the child assumes the native state of his parents.
Otherwise history would be replete with tales of mad dashes with pregnant women to get them to an American embassy or an American ship in order to preserve the child's natural rights. I can recall no such thing.