This citation is a bit of a mess. If you read Wong Kim Ark closely, it acknowledges that the children of aliens were considered natural born subjects only so long as the parents remained in the country and gave allegiance to the King. They had to have permanent allegiance, thus the Wong decision hinges on the parents being permanent U.S. residents. Obama’s father was not a permanent U.S. resident. Even so, the 14th amendment only made it possible to declare such a person to be a ‘citizen of the United States’ and not a natural born citizen.
Maybe you could site a relevant passage from it. The part I posted said this...
"If they didn't, they could not be President of the U.S. The holding in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark states that Wong Kim Ark is a native-born citizen."
That specifically says "native-born" not "natural-born" and goes on to say that a thorough discussion of "natural-born," taken from Minor v. Happersett, was the basis of their decision in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.
If you read Wong Kim Ark closely, it acknowledges that the children of aliens were considered natural born subjects only so long as the parents remained in the country and gave allegiance to the King.
We don't have Kings so that doesn't make any sense.
Pester those with willful ignorance, otherwise such ignorance becomes common coin.