Well, you certainly can refer to cases than have failed to reach the court's attention for a variety of reasons, but the precedent you refer to is no more than, "Don't expect the court to accept your petition if it is procedurally flawed".
Once more, can you point to a case where the court faced the issue, considered the merits of the matter and necessarily interpreted the clause? (Clue: there is none.)
Bear with me for one more moment and consider this language:
No person except a natural born citizen[, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,] shall be eligible to the office of President...
If all but the language within the brackets was proposed a reviewer would have said, "Wait a minute by definition there will not be any NB citizens prior to the date this contract is formed - because they would not have had parents who were citizens of this new nation we are about to create!". That would have produced the need to add the language set out in the brackets.
Most importantly, if nothing more than mere citizenship was required, as clearly is the current proposition, then there would be no need at all for the founders to add any reference to "natural born citizen".
If we further recognize the language addresses two types of citizenship, we have to wonder how the NBC form may have been preferred over the plain version. That answer is provided by the well published intention of the founders to avoid foreign entanglements.
A petition that is procedurally flawed? My FRiend, Upthread I posted a link that shows, for Obama alone, 226 petitions that failed to even be considered. You think they are all procedurally flawed? That thousands of great legal minds over several years of diligent efforts put together petitions that are procedurally flawed?
Get real.
Most importantly, if nothing more than mere citizenship was required, as clearly is the current proposition, then there would be no need at all for the founders to add any reference to "natural born citizen".
There was a specific reason why the founders declined to identify and describe what exactly an NBC is. Do you know why? I do. So do thousands of legal experts and historians. And what we all know is that Obama, Kamala, Ted Cruz, John McCain, Vivek, Cleveland, Nikki and yes even Donald Trump are all eligible to serve as they are (or were) citizens.
Look. There are plenty of reasons to want Nikki to fail. We heard these same lame arguments against Ted Cruz, only so so loudly vocal since he was less hated than Obama or Nikki. But to grandstand on this issue as you people do only shows racism and hypocracy.
Stop it.
This point has been raised before, but for some reason people believing the "English law" theory, don't seem to be able to grasp it.
Yes, if being born here made you a "citizen", why wasn't everyone born here already considered a "natural born citizen"?