You are mistaken. The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution is very clear. If you are born in the United States, and you are subject to it's laws, you are a citizen by birth of the United States.
The exclusionary clause (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) is for the cases of diplomats who are not under the U.S. jurisdiction.
If you don't like it, change the Constitution, but that is the law of the land.
“If you don’t like it, change the Constitution, but that is the law of the land.”
Please show me where it says that the exclusionary clause is for diplomats!
This is the “law of the land” because no one has directly challenged this view!
If the fourteenth amendment is very clear, then why did all American-born Indians have to get citizenship through a congressional law in 1924?!?!?!
Let us appeal to enlightened and disinterested judges. No one is more so than Vattel. Jefferson
Vattel is one of the most zealous and constant advocates for the preservation of good faith in all our dealings
“The exclusionary clause (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) is for the cases of diplomats who are not under the U.S. jurisdiction.”??
In the Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873), the Supreme Court stated, “The phrase, “subject to its jurisdiction” was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”