Wong Kim Ark was not specifically about "Natural Born Citizen" per the Constitution. The words written by the justice who wrote that opinion were not addressing this specific issue. It was not "on point."
So, it is a false argument.
The issue has to do with what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote into the Constitution the specific words, "Natural Born Citizen" AND also exempted their own generation, since none of them could have met the criteria.
For that, we turn to the "Law of Nations," which the Founders referred to among other legal resources (such as Blackstone), to understand what their understanding was.
Wong Kim Ark was not specifically about "Natural Born Citizen" per the Constitution. The words written by the justice who wrote that opinion were not addressing this specific issue. It was not "on point."
So, it is a false argument.
The issue has to do with what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote into the Constitution the specific words, "Natural Born Citizen" AND also exempted their own generation, since none of them could have met the criteria.
For that, we turn to the "Law of Nations," which the Founders referred to among other legal resources (such as Blackstone), to understand what their understanding was.
Nice try...but the fact remains..parentage is NOT in the Constitution. Ted Cruz was eligible. Vivek is also though he's a hack.