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.
Many of your claims are premised on state law. Law which is immaterial to US citizenship law.
Your petty attempts at belittlement are hillarious, "about 100 years after the Constitution was written" - like WKA?
I've shown "case law" and the understanding of the Penn. Supreme Court which both affirm that these Naturalization Acts mean that the children of aliens naturalize upon the naturalization of their parents whether the children are born here or not.
This was the case until WKA which, by using ECL to broaden the “subject to the jurisdiction” clause of the 14th Amendment, resolved the doubts mentioned in Minor.
“...it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
Using that broadened interpretation the Court applied it to domiciled aliens, thus resolving the doubts about “[including] as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.”
Wong was "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" and was declared a citizen.
Prior to Ark the children of aliens where themselves alien. Subsequent to Ark the US born children of domiciled aliens where "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" and therefor citizens.
Wong was not determined to be a natural born citizen.
The definition of an Art. II natural born citizen, US born children of citizens, has not been modified by Ark and was recognized by Minor.