No, he was an artificial born citizen, because it required an artificial, manmade, statutory law to make him a U.S. citizen, if and only if the U.S. Embassy or Consulate determined the residency requirements of the statutory law permitted the AUA.S. citizenship. A natural born citizen has no statute of law and no residency requirements because the person is by nature only a U.S. citizen and no other at birth. It is the literal difference between something which is inherently natural by its physical existence versus the manmade and there fore artificial existence of the thing or the status as a member of the society. Compare to the natural born woman versus the artificial and legal transgendered woman. Just as there is a natural woman versus an artificial womn, you also have the natural born citizen and the artificial born citizen.
“No, he was an artificial born citizen, because it required an artificial, manmade, statutory law to make him a U.S. citizen,”
That is such jacked up logic it isn’t funny. The same could be said of anyone at any time: “Yes, we know he was born here to two American parents but nothing says that makes him a citizen.”
In fact, throughout history laws were made that granted citizenship or took it away. You are simply buying into a line of illogical reasoning that says, “Of course he was born here so that makes him a citizen”, when in fact there could be laws that say otherwise. Such as, “No person born on US soil is a citizen until the age of 21 and having served two years military service.”