Sorry Rougie, in Perkins v. Elg, it was held that Marie Elg was a natural born citizen because she was born in the United States, without regard to parentage. In Ark the USSC ruled that Ark was born a citizen because persons born in the US (with rare exceptions) are NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.<quoted text>
Yep, "Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen" but only one of Barracks parents was a US citizen!
And "United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that practically everyone born in the United States is a U.S. citizen" only says US Citizen and never mentions "Natural Born Citizen".
To be a Natural Born Citizen BOTH parents had to be US citizens.
And, sorry Rougie, the USSC in Ark mentioned "natural born" several times in regard to persons born in this country, leaving no doubt that Ark was a natural born citizen. Even the United States admitted that if Ark was born a citizen in the US he would be eligible to be President. Duh!
If you want the direct citation and quote I will give it to you, but I have posted it several times. Got Alzheimer's?
"And if you notice the article challenged George Romney's NBC status but both of George Romney's parents (Mitt's grandparents) were both U.S. citizens which makes George Romney a NBC."
Sorry, George was never the Republican candidate and his status was never established. Secondly, George Romney's parentage would have been immaterial if he had been born in the US. See Perkins v. Elg., and US v. Ark.
Similarly, McCain's parentage would have been immaterial if he had been born in the US.
Focus on the immaterial is the province of the fool.