Will the Supreme’s over-turn their prior ruling on natural born-citizen and merely require that a single parent be born in the United States?
Neither the Supremes nor Congress can change any law of the land stated in the Constitution, i.e. here, the natural born citizen requirement. The only means for changing the Constitution is by amendment - and that would be no easy trick. Simple example of why the “citizen parentS” must remain the criteria: if only one citizen parent was required, and Hugo Chavez married an american woman - their child could be president. With that basic premise, at every election the country would be at risk of one or both candidates having divided loyalty. That divided loyalty is what comes from being the child of one non-citizen - because the child is born citizenship in two countries, and that means the other country has a claim on you in many aspects. Most obvious: you could be called into military service by the other country.
The potential problems - and therefore the potential threat - of dual loyalty is precisely the reason the Founders required the president to be “natural born”: the fruit of two American citizens, and therefore without divided loyalty.
Our Founders were brilliant men!
Other saying natural born citizen in the Constituion, the criteria is ABSENT. That is why the USSC had to develop the criteria in case law. Therefore, they, and they alone (absent legislation defining the criteria) can change it.
Two different issues here. The Constitution says Natural Born Citizen and may only be changed by Constitutional amendment. How Natural Born Citizen is defined CAN be changed by the USSC.