Yeah, yeah. Its not about eligibility is the new argument. Lets move the goal post shall we. Its in black and white. SCOTUS has spoken. Like Roe V. Wade. Its settled law.
The ruling was that she was a natural born citizen. It had to be defined - it was. She was. Period. Its ruling, not dictum. Unanimous, never overturned and cited of other cases for its actual definition.
Simple stuff. Very simple.
But it is an inconvenient truth - for some.
Minor v. Happersett has been cited for the Supreme Court in Obama eligibility appeals. The Supreme Court hasn’t yet been convinced.
Because U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark came 24 years after Minor, Wong has been considered the definitive ruling on the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and not Minor. Wong has been cited more than 1,000 times; Minor, not so much.
The government asked the Supreme Court to rule in Wong: “Are Chinese children born in this country to share with the descendants of the patriots of the American Revolution the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth?” If so, then verily there has been a most degenerative departure from the patriotic ideals of our forefathers; and surely in that case American citizenship is not worth having.”
http://librarysource.uchastings.edu/library/research/special-collections/wong-kim-ark/AppellantsBrief.pdf The Government (Appellant) Brief: US v Wong Kim Ark (page 18 of 20 of the pdf) Page 34 of the original