You seem to be of the opinion that recycling the same old arguments in a slightly different format is enough to lend credibility to said arguments.
They don’t.
Argue for a Constitutional amendment defining the requirements of what it means to be a “natural-born citizen”; that would be a more effective use of your time than retreading old ground that has already been deemed worthless for the goal you have in mind.
No amendment necessary.
SCOTUS needs to speak.
Without weasel words or self-justifying rhetoric, to produce a pre-approved conclusion, to thereby formally (as opposed to merely de facto) allow obvious foreign influence at the level of POTUS.
John Jay was not just whistling Dixie, you know.