Nope. Going to have to agree to disagree.
You are absolutely misrepresenting that case. So it is either because you don’t understand what you are reading OR you are doing it intentionally.
Since you left out
United States v. Wong Kim Ark,
which has a pretty strong DISSENTING opinion about natural born citizenship ...and a majority opinion about natural born citizens and allegience...
I am going to assume you are misleading on purpose to support your agenda.
I don’t do that.
I try to look at all sides.