Wong was read and dissected the summer of 2008. You are late to the party.
BUT.....There was decision in Nov. or Dec. 2009 which relied heavily on Wong. I feel comfy with Wong!
The Indiana case:
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf
For some reason, the “Birther” guys, did not mention Wong and relied on Vattel, etc....However, the Court reminded them about that little Wong sitting out there...all alone.....and waiting for the Birthers....
parsy, who thinks Wong is Wight
Good comment, but it will fall on deaf brains. The bulk of the WKA decision is a review of common law and case law in trying to ascertain the meaning of the various types of citizenship. The meat is in the conclusion where citizenship (not natural born citizenship) is dependent on the status of the parents being permanent immigrants and not visiting scholars. Nevertheless, there will be more cherry-picking and twisting by faithers than you'd see at an IFP Clinton intern party.