The only reason I make no statement about Bellei is that I don’t recall the facts of the case right now, and I am not particularly interested in looking them up in any case. And sure, the courts might have got it wrong. They often do.
Also, I am not particularly concerned with what some court or other has said in their dicta. It’s meaningless verbiage. I am far more interested in what the US Code says, and it defines naturalization as a process that takes place AFTER birth, never at birth or before. Any US Citizen at birth is by definition NOT naturalized.
You are so wrong about all this, that I don’t think it possible to get you turned around. Maybe you will come to it on your own, as I did, or maybe you will live on in delusion for your entire life.
Either way, I’m OK with it. No sweat off my brow.
The Bellei case construes the same section of code that applies to Cruz, with an intervening amendment or two that aren't relevant.
The finding that Bellei is naturalized cannot be dicta. The case depends on Bellei being naturalized in the first place.
Bellei lost his citizenship. If he hadn't lost his citizenship, the case would not exist. If Bellei was a natural born citizen, Congress could not have involuntarily stripped him (and all others similarly situated) of their citizenship.
-- You are so wrong about all this, that I don't think it possible to get you turned around. --
I'm open to reasoned persuasion, but all you have is gibberish and baloney, and a willingness to mislead others with it.