[edge919]

Don't be ridiculous. Since when does the Supreme Court rely on a "wiki" to summarize the holding of a case for them?? Again, you can't get around the actual facts. The Supreme Court gave the holding of Minor in Wong Kim Ark and INCLUDED the inconvenient fact that the Minor court based Virginia Minor's citizenship on being born to citizen parents, contrary to her argument of being a citizen via the 14th amendment.

Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.

Are you going to call this a "screw up" too???

[Mr Rogers]

The decision in Minor would have been identical IF they HAD declared that the 14th made her a citizen. The source of her citizenship - NBC, 14th or naturalization - was irrelevant to the decision. Thus it was not a citizenship case. The source of citizenship had nothing to do with the decision.

Wiki often gives a good, simple summary - and I was hoping a good, simple summary would help you. I’ve long known you cannot read 1-2 sentences, written in adult English, without totally screwing them up.