I didn't say they "support" my conclusion; I said they ADMITTED the points that I've brought up. And by footnote, they admitted there was no actual legal precedent for the "guidance" they claimed to have divined from the Wong Kim Ark decision. It's part of the reason that decision never declared Obama to be a natural-born citizen. Any decision that does so on the basis of Ankeny does so because of unsupported dicta and NOT an actual legal precedent.
And until you can demonstrate that someone in authority has agreed that Obama is not eligible to be President, your points stand only in your own mind.
The Supreme Court AGREED UNANIMOUSLY that NBC = "all children born in the country to parents who were its citizens." No lower court decision trumps this. And there's been NO concensus even among the lower courts because they don't use consistent reasoning to dismiss the lawsuits. Ankeny admitted what I've talked about and I've given those citations. Just because they weaseled out of the decision on procedural grounds doesn't change the fact that they could NOT declare Obama to be eligible for office.
One area where liberals cannot help but give themselves away is the judiciary. Conservatives gave up on the judiciary ages ago. We watched as liberals infested it, took it over, and used it to advance liberalism and undermine conservatism at every turn. We long ago realized the black robed bullies are not our friends—and they are the mirror opposite of objective. They are mostly liberals, sprinkled w a few (a VERY few) less-liberal but not actually conservative rarities.
Liberals have no similar cynicism toward the judiciary. To them it is a source of truth and authority. Otherwise, why cite it as somehow definitive or even pertinent in matters of the Constitution and other issues? Iow, when you come across someone who cites judges as a type of objective authority, you know you are dealing w a liberal.
The most amazing part being they have no idea what they are doing. I.e.: it genuinely never occurs to them to connect the dots between liberals in black robes and liberal decisions. They believe the game is on the level, and incredibly, they expect conservatives to believe it too.
Here’s a good analogy. In every crucial football game, the umpires, who are unabashedly fans of one of the two teams, make every call in favor of ‘their’ team. Their team wins. When it does, their fans go wild and stomp around in a wild victory dance, telling everyone how great their team is. They are not sharp enough to correlate the biased umping w their victory, nor are they aware that everyone else can see the bias plainly. So they prance around looking really stupid, and never once suspect that’s what they’re doing.
Likewise liberals citing the judiciary. What they are actually highlighting is the fact that liberals decide cases in favor of liberals. Yet the leftist cheerleaders of the judiciary think that is ‘justice’ as its finest, and sincerely can’t understand why conservatives don’t agree.
At least their myopia tells us something: it tells us they are true blue libs. Fwiw, it’s something.