Doubts they did not try to resolve in Minor. It wasn’t an issue in that case so it didn’t need resolution.
It WAS an issue in WKA, which resolved the doubts - as far as the SCOTUS is concerned. And I see no reason to believe the US Supreme Court will overturn WKA and 100+ years of accepted legal reasoning to remove a sitting President.
I don’t LIKE WKA, and I think the dissent had the stronger argument, but it doesn’t do much good to whine 100+ years later. No one has any legal justification for ruling that Obama is ineligible IF he was born in the USA.
If you read the rest of Minor, it actually goes on to resolve the doubts because it talks about the original naturalization acts that required fathers to be naturalized in order for their children to become citizens. Nothing in WKA disputes this. All WKA did was build a case that the children of aliens (through the 14th amendment) could be born citizens if their parents had more than just temporary allegiance in a country. The dissent disagreed on that basis because it said even ‘permanent allegiance’ wasn’t enough for the 14th amendment to override the treaty with China.