This is a tacit admission that the 14th Amendment does not extend birthright citizenship to the children of aliens. He wants it to be that way.
In fact, the citizenship clause is written in the present tense. The overt reason was to deal with the uncertain state of affairs pursuant to the end of the Civil War and the emancipation of slaves. In fact it was an unnecessary statement for people pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The real reason for the clause was to extend the protections of the Bill of Rights to persons other than natural persons, i.e., corporations. It was later admitted by Senators Bingham and Conkling.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" meant those that were American 'subjects.' It did not mean that one became "a subject" by merely being within the national boundaries. One was "subject" by virtue of citizenship. I suggest you consult a law dictionary of that time to confirm the meaning of the term.
It doesn't "extend" birthright citizenship to the children of [resident] aliens, in the sense that it really had no intention of making any actual changes in the rule of citizenship as it had been up until that time. The purpose was simply to declare what the law already was, and to try and make sure that no one (read, "former slave-holders, and officials in the former slave-holding states") could deny the rights and privileges of citizenship, in particular, to the millions of freed former slaves.
The children born here of resident alien parents had always been natural-born members of the society. First they were called "natural born subjects," then they were called "natural born citizens" when we substituted the word "citizen" for "subject."
The real reason for the clause was to extend the protections of the Bill of Rights to persons other than natural persons, i.e., corporations. It was later admitted by Senators Bingham and Conkling.
Um... no. The real reason was as stated above.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" meant those that were American 'subjects.' One was "subject" by virtue of citizenship.
No, the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" really meant "fully subject to the laws of the United States, without any kind of special exemption or immunity." The term did not include Indians (i.e., Native Americans), as long as they stayed within their tribes. When they left their tribes and came to live among the white man, they became "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States," whether they became United States citizens or not. And Indians, even though born on United States soil, had to go through a naturalization process if they were born in Indian tribes NOT because they had non-citizen parents, but because they were born as members of a de facto foreign nation which we made treaties with, just as we made treaties with England and France. However, once they left their tribe and came to live among the white man, their children born subject to United States jurisdiction were natural born citizens.
I suggest you consult a law dictionary of that time to confirm the meaning of the term.
I suggest you consult the same law dictionary for what "native" meant. "Native" and "natural born" were generally taken to be synonymous, although "natural born" is a slightly more expansive term that most likely includes the children born overseas of US citizen parents.