They did not deliberately delete anything. Nor would there have been any need to, since Minor has no bearing on the subject - a fact the Minor court knew, and all subsequent courts have known.
When I normally quote Minor, I use a different website - because there are several that publish them, and the first one I bookmarked was here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0088_0162_ZS.html
However, when I do legal research for my classes, or when a lawyer prepares for a case, I don’t use public websites. I use NexisLexis via the school, while the majority of folks working in law use Westlaw.
As best as I could tell from your birther fantasy conspiracy websites, they claim justia.com deleted, not Minor, but references to Minor in other cases, none of which involved the meaning of NBC. I’m sorry you and your friends think there is some great conspiracy, but Minor has been available all along on all the websites. It has been correctly maintained on Justia. And I can easily access it via NexisLexis, and I’m sure Westlaw also has it.
Like most other birther fantasies, there is no meat in your hamburger patty. There isn’t a competent lawyer anywhere in the country, and no district attorney, and no court in the country that thinks Minor has any relevance to Obama, McCain or Ted Cruz. The inability of birthers to read simple sentences and paragraphs - let alone pages and entire opinions - is what keeps birthers spinning their wheels, slinging mud everywhere and achieving nothing of value.
Do you teach? Or are you a student? And what are you teaching and/or studying?
I'm asking because if you're in academia, it's quite odd that you asserted that "US law cannot compel someone in Britain to be treated as a citizen of the US" when such can quite clearly be proven false, as I've easily done.
More spin from an Obot. It was very convenient that a “leading legal website” removed references to Minor from other SCOTUS cases in 2008, just as the eligibility issue was raised. It was not a fantasy - Justia was caught red-handed - snapshots of their web pages before and after the change were compared. They have intentionally mislead the US public - not a big deal for an Obot who does the same on FR on a daily basis.