Gee if you remove the parts that are inconvenient, then you can justify almost anything. It IS part of the syllabus, so why would it have to be removed?? Section 1 of the syllabus is also about citizenship, and citizenship IS included in the other four parts. The question revolves around whether the 14th amendment created a suffrage right related to the type of citizenship it created. In order to say that it did not do so, the court had to explain that there was no suffrage privilege for all citizens PRIOR to the 14th amendment, thus it had to explain how citizenship was determined as part of that rationale.
By defining NBC and rejecting the citizen clause of the 14th amendment for citizens, that definition is still necessary for the holding. It's why Gray included it in his summary of Minor. Keep in mind that nowhere in the Minoor decision does the court specifically say that Minor was born to citizen parents. Gray still read that decision and recognized that she had to have been born to citizen parents and thus included that element as part of the citation. It directly related to the point he was making that NBCs were excluded from the citizen clause in addition to exceptions to the subject clause that were identified in Slaughterhouse and within common law.
You are among friends on this issue, but that ridiculous and non-responsive statement and its tone suggests you are overinvested in your position.
One thing we do agree on, if the current eligibility issue gets before the USSC (and it probably will will not absent impeachment proceedings) the court will likely cite Minor with favor.