[Nero Germanicus]

I don’t know of a single legal scholar who has advocated for a different point of view from the one expressed in the majority opinion in 1884’s Elk v. Wilkens: “This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”

[Ray76]

Interesting that in Ark Gray rejected Elk when he himself wrote the majority opinion in Elk.

[Ray76]

Ted Cruz was born in Canada.

[DiogenesLamp]

I don’t know of a single legal scholar who has advocated for a different point of view from the one expressed in the majority opinion in 1884’s Elk v. Wilkens: “This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”

I do not perceive any dispute with this point. If you are only a citizen by the function of a Congressional law, you can only be a "naturalized" citizen. If you are a citizen by nature, and not by law, you are a "natural" citizen.

The point remains, subsequent laws cannot make one "natural", they can only make you "like natural." i.e. "Adopted."