I did read what you wrote. And I've read what the court wrote. And it's almost as if we're reading different decisions. What the justice wrote was:
"We have given this case the careful consideration its importance demands. If the law is wrong, it ought to be changed; but the power for that is not with us. The arguments addressed to us bearing upon such a view of the subject may perhaps be sufficient to induce those having the power to make the alteration, but they ought not to be permitted to influence our judgment in determining the present rights of the parties now litigating before us. No argument as to woman's need of suffrage can be considered. We can only act upon her rights as they exist. It is not for us to look at the hardship of withholding. Our duty is at an end if we find it is within the power of a state to withhold.
Being unanimously of the opinion that the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of suffrage upon anyone, and that the constitutions and laws of the several states which commit that important trust to men alone are not necessarily void, we affirm the judgment."
Nowhere does it affirm or deny her citizenship status. That was not a matter before the court. What was under consideration was whether Virginia Minor, as a U.S. citizen, had the right to vote. The court said no.
I quoted you several specific citations that rejected HER argument of being a 14th amendment citizen and showed you the two points of the official summary that acknowledged her citizenship as part of the decision - citizenship based on being born to citizen parents. No one denies that she was trying to gain suffrage and what you quoted addressed that part of the decision, but it was NOT the only part of the decision. Read it all. Learn it all. Comprehend it all.