Wow, way to spread misinformation. If you had read the case carefully you would see that you are incorrect.
As I said earlier, the Court's "doubts" were wether children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents were even Citizens. The Court had no doubts about who were the natural born Citizens. That is how they determined her Citizenship, by defining the class of natural born Citizens and including her within that class.
This is a direct holding of the case and is binding precedent.
I simply disagree with you about the significance of the Minor decision. All of the arguing in the world, by you or me, will not result in either of us changing our minds.
That said, I am most definitely NOT for Rubio in any way. His cave on immigration was a betrayal of what he campaigned on - and such a naked betrayal so soon after being elected for the first time indicated the contents of his character.
WRT Cruz, I like the guy a lot, but I’ve also been put off by some of his tactics of late. I’d still like to see his extraordinary intellect and his bulldog tactics used to this country’s advantage...and I think that President Trump could do that by naming him to be the AG or to the Court itself (or maybe AG first, followed a couple years later by the Court). BTW, given the problems between Trump & Cruz of over the last few weeks, I don’t see either of them naming the other as Veep (even if it is Constitutional).
I honestly don’t know who’d be the best Veep for Trump...but I think that you and I probably agree that among those left in the field (Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson and Kasich), the most electable one is Trump. While I’m not thrilled with him as being the ideal conservative candidate (he’s clearly not that mythical creature), he does SEEM to me William Buckley’s test for support (i.e. the most conservative candidate who is likely to prevail in the general election).