I don’t believe that one of those cases was decided on US constitutional arguements. They were decided on state electoral and procedural grounds, or issues of “standing.”
The actual Article II constitutional issue was never argued on the constitutional merits by opposing counsels before a court of inquiry.
Here are 19 state and federal eligibility challenges that ruled explicitly on Obama’s Article II, Section 1 natural born citizenship and in each ruling found him to qualify as a natural born citizen.
1. Allen v. Obama et al, No. C20121317 (Ariz. Pima County Super. Ct. Mar. 7, 2012) (dismissing case challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on the 2012 ballot; finding that Obama is a ”natural born citizen” under Wong Kim Ark; and expressly rejecting argument that Minor v. Happersett holds otherwise), appeal filed (Ariz. App. Ct. 2d Div. Mar. 8, 2012);
2. Ankeny v. Daniels, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (“based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude 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”) transfer denied 929 N.E.2d 789 (Ind. 2010);
3. Fair v. Obama, No. 06C12060692 (Md. Carroll Cty. Cir. Ct., Aug. 27, 2012 (relying on Ankeny and Wong Kim Ark to hold that Obama is a “natural born citizen” eligible to serve as President);
4. Farrar v. Obama, No. OSAH-SECSTATE-CE- 1215136-60-MALlHI (Ga. Office of St. Admin. Hrg. Feb. 3, 2012) (rejecting challenge to Obama’s eligibility to appear on 2012 ballot; finding that Obama was born in U.S. and is a “natural born citizen”), decision adopted by Ga. Sec’y of State (Feb. 7, 2012), appeal dismissed, Farrar et al v. Obama et al., No. 2012CV211398 (Ga. Fulton County Super. Ct. Mar. 2, 2012), recons. denied (Mar. 14, 2012), appeal denied, No. S12D1180 (Ga. Apr. 11, 2012);
5. Freeman v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 103 (Ill. Bd. of Elections Hearing Officer Recommendation Jan. 27, 2012) (overruling objection to Obama’s placement on 2012 primary ballot; finding that Obama’s long form birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. Bd. of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012); Freeman v. Obama, No. 12 SOEB GE 112 (Ill. Bd. Elections, Sept. 17, 2012) (recommending rejection of objection filed seeking to keep Obama off general election ballot in 2012 on grounds that he is not a “natural born citizen”; relying on prior decision (12 SOEB GP 103) which held that Obama’s long form birth certificate sufficiently established birth in the United States);
6. Galasso v Obama, No. STE 04588-12 (N.J. Adm. Apr. 10, 2012) (initial decision rejecting challenge to Obama’s 2012 nominating position and finding that, assuming Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a “natural born citizen” eligible for the presidency per Ankeny and Wong Kim Ark), decision adopted as final (N.J. Sec’y of State Apr. 12, 2012);
7. Jackson v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 104 (Ill. Bd. of Elections Hearing Officer Recommendation Jan. 27, 2012) (recommending rejection of objection to Obama’s placement on 2012 primary ballot; finding that Obama’s long form birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. Bd. of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012);
Jackson v. Obama, No. 12 SOEB GE 113 (Ill. Bd. Elections, Sept. 17, 2012) (overruling objection filed seeking to keep Obama off general election ballot in 2012 on grounds that he is not a “natural born citizen”; relying on prior decision (12 SOEB GP 104) which held that Obama’s long form birth certificate sufficiently established birth in the United States);
8. Kesler v. Obama, No. 2012-162 (Ind. Election Comm’n Feb. 24, 2012) (denying objection seeking to keep Obama off 2012 ballot on grounds that he is not a “natural born citizen”);
9. Jordan v. Secretary of State Sam Reed, No. 12-2-01763-5, 2012 WL 4739216 (Wash. Super. Ct. Aug. 27, 2012) (dismissing as frivolous plaintiff’s complaint seeking to prevent state from including Obama on 2012 ballot, noting that many similar claims had been filed and, in some cases, such as Ankeny v. Governor of State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (2009), courts addressed the merits of the claims; concluding: “just as all the so-called evidence offered by plaintiff has been in the blogosphere for years, in one form or another, so too has all the law rejecting plaintiff’s allegations. I can conceive of no reason why this lawsuit was brought, except to join the chorus of noise in that blogosphere. The case is dismissed.”);
10. Judd et al v. Obama et al, No. 8:12-cv-01507-DOC-AN (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2012) (dismissing lawsuit purportedly removed by plaintiffs from state court case to federal court);
Judd et al v. Obama et al, No. 8:12-cv- 01888-DOC-AN (C.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2012) (dismissing lawsuit stating election fraud, RICO, and various other claims seeking to prevent Obama from being on 2012 general election ballot (among other things);
11. Martin v. Obama, No. 12 SOEB GE 111 (Ill. Bd. Elections, Sept. 17, 2012) (overruling objection filed seeking to keep Obama off general election ballot in 2012 on grounds that he is not a “natural born citizen”; relying on prior decision in Freeman and Jackson primary challenges (12 SOEB GP 103 and 12 SOEB GP 104), which held that Obama’s long form birth certificate sufficiently established birth in the United States);
12. Paige v. Obama, No. 611-8-12 WNCV (Vt. Superior Ct., Sept. 21, 2012) (denying motion for temporary restraining order to prevent placement of Obama on the 2012 general election ballot and holding that “[t]he common law of England, the American colonies, and later the United States, all support one interpretation only: “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”), citing Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678, 688 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010);
13. Powell v. Obama, No. OSAH- SECSTATE-CE-1216823-60-MALIHI (Ga. Office of St. Admin. Hrg. Feb. 3, 2012) (rejecting challenge to Obama’s eligibility to appear on 2012 ballot; finding that Obama was born in U.S. and is a “natural born citizen), decision adopted by Ga. Sec’y of State (Feb. 7, 2012), appeal dismissed, No. 2012CV211528 (Ga. Fulton County Super. Ct. Mar. 2, 2012), motion for injunction denied, No. S12D1077 (Ga. Mar. 13, 2012), appeal denied (Ga. Apr. 4, 2012);
14. Purpura v Obama, No. STE 04588- 12, 2012 WL 1369003 (N.J. Adm. Apr. 10, 2012) (initial decision rejecting challenge to Obama’s 2012 nominating position and finding that, assuming Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a “natural born citizen” eligible for the presidency per Ankeny and Wong Kim Ark), decision adopted as final (N.J. Sec’y of State Apr. 12, 2012) aff’d, No. A-004478-11-T03, 2012 WL 1949041 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. May 31, 2012) (per curiam), cert. denied, No. 071052 (N.J. Sept. 7, 2012;
15. Strunk v. N.Y. Bd. of Elections et al, 35 Misc. 3d 1208(A), 2012 WL 1205117, 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 50614 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Apr. 11, 2012) (N.Y. King County Supr. Ct. Apr. 11, 2012) (dismissing complaint challenging, among other things, President Obama’s eligibility to his office; expressly rejecting the claim that Obama is ineligible on the basis of his father’s citizenship as frivolous, and issuing a show cause order as to why sanctions should not be imposed upon plaintiff);
16. Swensson v. Obama, No. OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1216218-60-MALIHI (Ga. Office of St. Admin. Hrg. Feb. 3, 2012) (rejecting challenge to Obama’s eligibility to appear on 2012 ballot; finding that Obama was born in U.S. and is a “natural born citizen”), decision adopted by Ga. Sec’y of State (Feb. 7, 2012), appeal dismissed, No. 2012CV211527 (Ga. Fulton County Super. Ct. Mar. 2, 2012), motion for injunction denied, No. S12D1076 (Ga. Mar. 13, 2012), appeal denied (Ga. Apr. 4, 2012);
17. Tisdale v. Obama, No. 3: 12-cv-00036 (E.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2012) (order dismissing complaint) (dismissing in forma pauperis complaint pursuant to 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and holding that “[i]t is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens” and that plaintiff’s contentions otherwise are “without merit”), aff’d, No. 12-1124 (4th Cir. Jun 5, 2012) (per curiam);
18. Voeltz v. Obama, No. 37 2012 CA 000467, 2012 WL 2524874 (Fla. 2nd Cir., Jun. 29, 2012) (dismissing complaint challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on 2012 ballot; finding that persons born in US are NBCs per Wong Kim Ark and Ankeny, regardless of parentage and rejecting arguments to the contrary); Voeltz v. Obama, No. 37 2012 CA 002063 (Fla. 2nd Cir. Sept. 6, 2012) (dismissing complaint seeking declaration that Obama is not eligible for presidency because he was not born in US and was not born to two US citizen parents; finding that persons born in US are “natural born citizens” per Wong Kim Ark and Ankeny, regardless of parentage and rejecting arguments to the contrary; reserving for later ruling motion for sanctions);
19. Welden v. Obama, No. OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1215137-60-MALIHI (Ga. Office of St. Admin. Hrg. Feb. 3, 2012) (rejecting challenge to Obama’s eligibility to appear on 2012 ballot; finding that Obama was born in U.S. and is a “natural born citizen), decision adopted by Ga. Sec’y of State (Feb. 7, 2012), appeal dismissed, No. 2012CV211527 (Ga. Fulton County Super. Ct. Mar. 2, 2012), motion for injunction denied, No. S12D1059 (Ga. Mar. 13, 2012), appeal denied (Ga. Apr. 4, 2012).