It’s a potential extenuating circumstance for those born of naturalized immigrant parents or even grandparents, who would otherwise have no doubt regarding their natural born citizenship status. The vast majority of such nations require a descendant of their citizens to claim citizenship themselves upon reaching the age of majority. It’s not a condition existing at birth. England was an exception at the time of Obama’s birth. They claimed the children of their citizens as citizens also, regardless of where they were born.
It is the law of nations and the right of expatriation, it is the law of nations regarding sovereign citizenship that is our law and by treaties with other nations, those foreign nations must first look to their treaty with the US when determining the status of children born there to American parents. The nations that claim a child born on their soil is always a member of their nation no matter what is because their law does not recognize the right of expatriation, that the individual is sovereign and that his inalienable rights rest within him. To those nations, only the king is sovereign and all rights rest within that one person and allegiance to him is perpetual. It can not be cast off. That feudal doctrine of the king was cast off from this nation on July 4, 1776. If it wasn’t, then we were never free from Great Britain and we all still owe fealty to her.
As far as the doctrine of “jus soli” citizenship. It does not exist in the British codes today. They finally banished it forever as it pertains to children born in England to 2 alien parents. Today, children with British heritage can claim the status of “British protected person” but not that of citizenship.
Now what that In means, I don’t know but I am guessing it has to do with the 20th century progressive doctrine of statelessness as defined by the United Nations that started appearing sometime during Woodrow Wilson’s tenure as president. Before then, stateless meant an innate piece of land that belonged to no country. A piece of land that had not yet been conquered. In their sick twisted minds, they think that a human being is property to be claimed by a state/nation and therefore the human has no God given inalienable rights. Their rights are what the government says they are and those rights are as fleeting as the ever changing governments.