The children of aliens, born within the U. S. are aliens; they do not acquire citizenship by birth
Evidence which you dismiss.
Because such evidence is clearly outweighed by an enormous amount of better evidence, which YOU dismiss.
The first of those we have gone through in some detail already. It was by a judge who was over several counties in Pennsylvania. There are far better authorities, and a great many of them, from early America, who absolutely contradict this several-counties judge's opinion.
Including Rawle, who carried a great deal of authority, who (unlike the little judge you prefer) was quoted by the US Supreme Court on the matter, and who was extremely clear that the child born on US soil of non-citizen immigrant parents was a natural born citzien.
The second case you mention was also the opinion of a single judge, in 1868. It is clear that some folks in that era (which was about 100 years after the Constitution was written) were making a case that the children of at last some immigrants were not citizens. They made the case in the instance of Wong Kim Ark. It reached the Supreme Court, which went back to the founding principles, and, again, found that Wong was a natural born citizen.
It's a matter of having a pound of evidence on one side of the scale, and 20 pounds of evidence on the other side of the scale. You adamantly claim that a pound of evidence outweighs 20 pounds of evidence.
It just isn't so.