Actually it was historical review, and as far as the decision in WKA goes, it is dicta. The case did not turn on whether WKA was a natural born citizen, but rather whether he was a citizen at all. The Court ruled that he was, not under English common law, but under the 14th amendment to the Constitution.
The Court used TWO arguments: That WKA was a NBC and thus a citizen, and that the 14th made him a citizen. Half the decision is based on the meaning of NBC. It showed WKA met the qualifications of NB Subject, and thus NBC, and thus was a citizen.
It is poor form to ignore half of a ruling just because you don’t like it. I’ve linked below for anyone who wants to read it themselves and see which of us is telling the truth - assuming, of course, that they don’t believe the Indiana courts, the SCOTUS rejection of birther cases, etc...
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html