The only one moving goalposts is you. I've already address this "widespread agreement" claim by showing that the decisions actually use a variety of inconsistent arguments. Many of these decisions are based on lower court dicta, not WKA interpretations. And you're STILL using a concensus argument. Just admit it. It's still a fallacy to do so.
“And you’re STILL using a concensus argument.”
__
I am certainly speaking of the consensus that exists, based on the fact that all of the judges who have ruled on the matter have come to the same conclusion. Not one has lent any support to the argument that the lack of two citizen parents precludes natural born citizenship. Not one. Nada. Zilch. There is a complete consensus on the conclusion, even if you want to quibble over the details of how they got there.
What I have not said is that I regard the consensus as evidence of correctness and, despite your insistence, you have still been unable to provide a quote in which I did so.