Talk about misdirection. Do you think that kind of approach impresses anyone other than yourself? You dismiss out of hand 50 pages of Wong Kim Ark really well though out dicta and cling for dear life to one paragraph of Minor dicta. You do that because you have nothing else solid to stand on. There is no one manning the oars on your ship. Interesting, says a lot about you.
I’m still waiting for your answer to the two citizen rule. I’d really like to see where it is written down.
You are misdirecting again. I didn't dismiss 50 pages of Wong Kim out of hand. I told you what Gray was doing. The only references in this decision to the specific Constitutional term of natural-born citizen are in reference to the Minor affirmation of the definition of natural-born citizen: all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens. The Ark court specifically affirms the holding in Minor as being based on citizen parents. If the court was redefining NBC, why would it affirm a holding based on having citizen parents??
Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States ...
The Ark court specifically said that NBCs are EXCLUDED from the birth clause of the 14th amendment and noted so because of the UNANIMOUS Minor decision:
all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is manifest from a unanimous judgment of the Court