Quite a few judges have ruled on the issue of natural born citizenship and presidential eligibility for either the 2008 or 2012 general election.
When people file lawsuits, judges are allowed to issue rulings on their claims.
I don’t know of a court decision since 1874 where Minor v Happersett was ruled to be precedential on the issue of natural born citizenship under Article II, Section 1. No judge has found Minor v Happersett to be persuasive in their rulings for 2008 or 2012.
Judges have cited US v Wong Kim Ark (1898) but not Minor v Happersett.
For example:
Allen v Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint
Birthers will just assert that the judge in that case was compromised.
Minor is quite clear that to be natural born, or a native, one must have two citizen parents. Wong Kim Arc totally defered to minor, but natural born was not an argument in the case, it was mere discussion. the sole issue for WKA was that the mother was here under legitimate authority, and she was.