When you make a point to quote umpteen court cases and other documents from the past relating to citizenship, the term is going to come up quite a lot. As you are so fond of pointing out though, all of that was orbiter dicta. Not holding. Do you know what the holding was?
That Wong Kim Ark was a citizen based on the 14th amendment.
Justice Gray:
The question presented by the record is whether a child born in the United States, ... becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, (and he even quotes it.)
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
Now how do you like that dicta shoe on YOUR foot?
As opposed to ZERO times in The Venus.
Well obviously they must be talking about some OTHER type of citizenship. Please tell us what kind that is Jeff?
You are a piece of work. In Wong, you conflate anything into "natural born citizenship", but in The Venus, you do everything you can to run away from the term. That this is completely nonsensical simply doesn't register with you.
What you will do next is completely ignore the fact that you can't come up with any other term to refer to the citizenship described in The Venus. You do this every time. When you are caught, you run away like a little coward and refuse to address the point.
You are a dishonest little coward that THINKS he is clever. You make up for in Brass and Volume what you lack in intellectual honest and competence.
Here's a clue.
When you mention something in passing - one or two sentences - and it's not relevant to the outcome of the case, that's obiter dicta.
Obiter dicta is "a thing said in passing."
When you discuss it for 40 pages, and that discussion is core to the resolution of the case, that's not obiter dicta. That's NOT "a thing said in passing."
That's CORE REASONING, and core reasoning is just as much a precedent as the final pronouncement.
That's basic law.
At this point, I am wondering about you.
You sound like you believe what you're saying. Given what you're saying, that is very odd.
If you really believe the nonsense you're spouting, then it seems to me that something is definitely wrong with you. Whether it is physiological, or psychological, something is wrong there.
I am wondering: How old are you? I am also wondering whether you have had any traumatic head injuries in the past.