Of course the Ankeny ruling must be viewed in that light by those on the other side of the issue and yet it is the most cited recent ruling on natural born citizen status and unlike Dred Scott v Sanford, it has generated next to no opposition within the legal/judicial community.
Three years after Ankeny v Daniels:
Voeltz v. Obama, John C. Cooper, Leon County, Florida Circuit Court Judge: “In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a ‘natural born citizen’ even though born in the United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—September 6, 2012
Yeah, but you read into it a little ways and you realize immediately that it was written by an idiot, and it is full of false presumptions and non sequiturs.
Again, the Ankeny ruling has got to be one of the most ignorant and stupid piece of crap that has ever been flushed out of a court toilet, and I generally have a low opinion of Judicial petty dictators anyway. That Ankeny ruling is the crap de la crap of judicial stupidity.
“In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a ‘natural born citizen’ even though born in the United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—September 6, 2012
And what is so hilarious is that after years of arguing that being born in this country is what makes you a "natural born citizen", you guys are trying to switch gears and tell us that this isn't actually necessary.