‘We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution’s Article II language ...’
__
So I’m right, yes? There’s not a single court ruling that agrees with you, and all you can do is repeat a cherry-picked sentence from a 19-page decision.
Of course, there’s this passage too:
‘Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.’
Now I understand, you think that the part you quoted undermines the part that I quoted. Now, all you have to do is find a judge who views it the same way.
How’s that going so far?