[DiogenesLamp]

In Minor v. Happersett the Supreme Court did not say that persons born in the U.S. of non-citizen parents were not natural born citizens, nor did the court say that they were natural born citizens. It merely acknowledged that some authorities believed that they were and also noted that other authorities had doubts about it. And the court explicitly stated that it was not their purpose to resolve those doubts one way or the other.

Funny thing though, the courts seemingly had no doubts in 1847.

BARRY v. MERCEIN, 46 U.S. 103 (1847)
4. The plaintiff in error being of legeance to the crown of England, his child, though born in the United States during its father's temporary residence therein,-twenty-two months and twenty days,-notwithstanding its mother be an American citizen, is not a citizen of the United States.

I wonder where the doubts crept in?

[Kleon]

Funny thing though, the courts seemingly had no doubts in 1847.

You're quoting the Plaintiff's argument, not an opinion of the Court.

[SoJoCo]

I wonder where the doubts crept in?

On the part of the plaintiff? Who knows? John Barry, the plaintiff in error, did contend that his daughter was not a citizen of the U.S. But the court did not rule that, nor did Chief Justice Taney make reference to the citizenship matter when he ruled against Mr. Barry and dismissed the case. So if there were doubts on the part of the court they didn't say so. In fact, since part of Mr. Barry's unsuccessful appeal was the claim his daughter was not a citizen, it might be said that the court disagreed with him in that as well as the other points of his case.