A court’s ruling stands unless and until that ruling is overturned by a higher court or Congress passes and a President signs into law an act that renders the court ruling moot.
The reason that Judge Gibney can state accurately that “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.” Is because that statement is based on the Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark which has been cited as precedent in more than 1000 subsequent court rulings and has never been overturned or even seriously challenged. Nor has the Wong holding been rendered moot by legislation to the contrary.
That is why a former conservative Republican state Senator from Columbus, Georgia, appointed to the federal judiciary by President George W. Bush could rule that: “A spurious claim questioning the president’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—Rhodes v. MacDonald, U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
Judge Land then imposed a $20,000 sanction on the attorney who brought the lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility and that fine (for filing a frivolous lawsuit) was upheld by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and then by the full U.S. Supreme Court.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2009/10/14/872844/judge-land-sanctions-orly-taitz.html
Which court has ruled on the evidence of the U.S. Secretaries of State citizenship determinations?