For about the 42nd time, he didn't. The entire reasoning of the case had to do with who was and was not a natural born citizen. The fact that he didn't say the magic words "natural born" in the final summary of the case is irrelevant. All of the core reasoning, which mentioned the phrase "natural born" literally dozens of times, is binding precedent.
Rides3 believes that only the final judgment statement is a binding holding of the court. He is wrong, but it is probably an honest error.
Obviously Justice Gray was worried about the cost in ink from adding the words "Natural born" to his decision. It would have simply put him over budget, and we couldn't have that.
It is very relevant. It is the holding.
The way the court works is they hear the case, then in that same week of oral arguments the justices vote.
After the vote, the most senior justice in the majority assigns the task of writing the majority opinion.
The most senior justice on the losing side decides who will write the main opinion for the dissenting viewpoint.
Justices draft opinions.
Justices' draft opinions are circulated among each other.
The justices then exchange comments, criticisms, and corrections by memos.
Justices may change their position, redraft their opinion, etc. The majority may become the minority and vice-verse.
They may vote again and continue their discussion by memorandum.
This process continues. Once all reviews are complete and the majority and dissent established, a final proof is made and authorized for printing.
Wong Kim Ark was ruled a "citizen" not a "natural born citizen".
Wongs parents were permanently domiciled, not transient aliens. Obama's father was a transient alien.
You claim WKA is on point when it is not, you claim WKA was held to be a natural born citizen when he was not. You are bootstrapping.