Since 1898, the citizenship status of the parents of a person born on US soil and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is irrelevant to that person’s own US citizenship. It’s settled law.
“subject to the jurisdiction” is not settled law.
Well, ignoring Plyler v Doe argumentum, what is SETTLED law is the context of how that phrase is applied in Ark. And in Ark, the Court says...
"The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative."If Ark - a child with no citizen-parents is a US citizen, and he CLEARLY IS, then Obama is a US citizen. Any argument to the contrary is absurd.