The argument made in WKA is NOT about natural-born citizenship. The only time they referred to it was when they brought Article II and how it was defined by the Minor court. WKA’s central argument was about a different term “citizenship by birth” ... which is why they did not pronounce WKA to be a natural-born citizen ... which Ankeny admits ... which means there’s no legal precedence for the DICTUM in Ankeny. The ONLY legal precedent Ankeny cited was from Minor. That’s it. Game. Set. Match.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!