Another Argument on the Jerusalem Registration

My comment on the US Supreme Court Jerusalem decision:

MENACHEM BINYAMIN ZIVOTOFSKY, BY HIS PARENTS AND GUARDIANS ARI Z. AND NAOMI SIEGMAN ZIVOTOFSKY, APPELLANT v. SECRETARY OF STATE, APPELLEE

 No. 07-5347 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14894July 23, 2013, Decided

News item here and an explanation here.

To my mind, an argument that was not used but, perhaps, has legal relevance, may have helped.

In short, the lack of specific identification of "country/state" (btw, for birth registration of American citizens in the area east of the Green Line and west of the Jordan River, the first choice as country is "West Bank", a geo-political entity that doesn't exist) causes an administrative bureaucratic mess-up for if a state is not appended to Jerusalem then it could be interpreted that the child was born, say, in the United States or New Zealand, countries which have cities/locations called "Jerusalem", and then, at the age of 18, he might become eligible for a military draft or social security payments or such simply because the state was not identified. Nothing political, nothing constitutional, just bureaucracy. 

Shouldn't clarity by part of the law?

This argument, at the least, could have forced the justices to at least order a correction in the procedure.

^