This is exactly my point. These subsequent courts are just engaging in a circle jerk where each of their opinions is merely the product of previous court opinions, and they all lead back to Rawle, and other ex post facto lawyers, none of which know what the H*** they are talking about!
The Ankeny Court stated that the fact pattern of WKA did not match the claimed fact pattern of Barry’s official “Dreams” narrative.
I automatically dismiss as willfully misinformed, anyone who cites Ankeny. It is a brain dead stupid ruling that doesn't pass for the quality of work one expects from a Kindergartner.
IMO there is NO SCOTUS ruling on whether a candidate like Barry would be NBC in an on-point case (identical or even close in fact pattern) in light of the “evolving” legal case law interpreting the Constitution up to the present moment. Therefore declarative statements that Barry is or is not NBC are premature.
My understanding is that if your citizenship requires positive law to make it valid, then it isn't "Natural." Barry is a 14th amendment citizen, and only that if you use the most liberal interpretation of the meaning of the 14th amendment.
You're too kind IMO. He's nothing more than a USC 8 citizen in my book. An alien student here on a student visa was the father. No way can his offspring be a natural born citizen.
...if your citizenship requires positive law to make it valid...
And USC 8 is definitely positive law!