“The Constitution can’t be changed with an EO.”
It does not need to be changed, only interpreted correctly. The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has a meaning and the courts have ignored the meaning of that phrase, it was NOT thrown in just to add meaningless verbiage.
The original idea was to cement the rights of former domestic born slaves. The jurisdiction clause is technically broad enough to cover a lot of mischievous things. If I visit Canada and drive my car and I speed and I get a ticket, the jurisdiction I am subject to with respect to that act is Canada’s. That doesn’t mean I’m a Canadian citizen. Constitutional amendments need to be spelled out painfully clear to avert abuse.