The definition of NBC used by Minor v. Happersett and Wong Kim Ark is ABOUT presidential eligibility. I just showed that. Second, you have no room to whine about dicta not carrying the force of law and then turn around and quote a state appeals court using even less relevant dicta (that they admit is wrong in their footnotes) as if it DOES carry the force of law. If you think it's wrong, then you're admitting the Indiana Appeals Court was wrong.
The definition of NBC used by Minor v. Happersett and Wong Kim Ark is ABOUT presidential eligibility. I just showed that. Second, you have no room to whine about dicta not carrying the force of law and then turn around and quote a state appeals court using even less relevant dicta (that they admit is wrong in their footnotes) as if it DOES carry the force of law. If you think it’s wrong, then you’re admitting the Indiana Appeals Court was wrong.
The Opinion in Minor v Happersett:
The Supreme Court of Missouri upheld the Missouri voting legislation saying that the limitation of suffrage to male citizens was not an infringement of Minor’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The United States Supreme Court in a unanimous decision affirmed and upheld the lower court’s ruling on the basis that the Fourteenth Amendment does not add to the privileges or immunities of a citizen, and that historically “citizen” and “eligible voter” have not been synonymous. Since the United States Constitution did not provide suffrage for women, the Fourteenth Amendment did not confer that right. The court’s decision had nothing to do with whether women were considered persons under the Fourteenth Amendment; the court ruled that they were clearly persons and citizens. It rested solely on the lack of provisions within the Constitution for women’s suffrage.
The subsequent ratification of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution rendered Minor v Happersett moot.
The Opinion in US v Wong Kim Ark
In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment, a child born in the United States of parents of foreign descent who, at the time of the child’s birth are subjects of a foreign power but who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying on business in the United States, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under a foreign power, and are not members of foreign forces in hostile occupation of United States territory, becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth.
The issue in Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels was whether Barack Hussein Obama II and John Sidney McCain qualified for Indiana’s Electoral College votes as natural born citizens. The decision in Ankeny directely related to presidential eligibility.
Just because YOU think that the decision in Ankeny was decided incorrectly doesn’t make it so. That’s why we have appeals courts. Ankeny was appealed to the Indiana Supreme Court and upheld. It was not appealed further to the federal courts.