“Try Article II, Section I, Clause 5 for the constitutional rule”
There is nothing there that answers the question.
That’s because the Founding Fathers left it to Congress.
And then those same people who wrote the Constitution were elected to the first Congress.
And then they passed a law in 1790 exercising the power to define who is a “natural born citizen.”
And Congress has exercised the power to define natural born citizen since 1790.
It is settled law that any law made which nullifies or negates part of the Constitution is void. All your arguments push the negating of the term “Natural born Citizen” making it indistinguishable from the term “Citizen” used in the same sentence and elsewhere in the Constitution.
The Constitution says there is a difference.
4 Supreme Courts have ruled on this issue.
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
No matter your argument or mine however, the fact is there is a 100 percent chance the Democrats have at least one liberal Federal Judge who will grant an injunction barring Cruz from the Ballot (if hes the Nominee) late in October. With the 4-4 USSC locked up it makes the Democrat’s walk to the White House unopposed.