Yes we have, and it's because you're the one who's obstinate.
Here's how our typical conversation goes:
You: To be a natural born citizen, you need two citizen parents.
Me: No you don't. US v. Kim Wong Ark clearly says you don't.
Then crickets.
Then the next day you repeat the line, "To be a natural born citizen, you need two citizen parents," as if no conversation had previously taken place.
Sometimes it goes a little differently. Instead of ignoring Kim Wong Ark, you say, without any basis, that it is not relevant to the current situation when it clearly is.
United States vs. Kim Wong Ark has absolutely NOTHING to do with this situation,
I see. So today you are choosing plan B. Okay, here we go.
The Kim Wong Ark case is directly relevant because it was a citizenship case. SCOTUS court ruled that Mr. Ark was a natural born citizen even though his parents were not. Please explain to me why that is different from the current situation.
as has been proved over and over again here on FR.
You can't prove something by simply repeating it over and over again.
pot calling the kettle black. You are defintiely mixing oranges and apples with your reference.
These days there are anchor babies, no legal parents required. Back then different laws and ICE regulations applied. Check those out and then continue yor deflection of reality.
AND the matter of citizenship is a minor aspect showing only the probable degree or ineligibility. YOu have to be a NATURAL born kind and there is no way Obambi, with a Kenyan/British father, qualifies even if he were born on US soil.
Nothing about the COLB you defend qualifies as it is a poor forgery and has even been taken off the Obama site.
It used to be posted everywhere. See if you can find a copy anywhere on the INternet.