Once again - the history of Indian citizenship is complicated with a lot of case law. You need to take the time to do some research. It only looks complicated to you because you do not understand it. The fact that Indian's children were not granted 14th amendment citizenship is proof that your Hard rule of "born on the soil" is missing something which you can't seem to comprehend.
It is amusing that you want to argue that historically, anyone born in this nation is a "citizen at birth" except for the following exceptions. Slaves. Indians. Diplomats.
The "rule" seems to have more exceptions than it does categories to whom it applies! :)
The funny thing is, none of this applies to the "Jus Sanguinus" method of determining citizenship. (by blood) All the categories of exception magically disappear, leaving exactly the groups of people who were historically granted citizenship and leaving out those groups who were not. It is elegantly simple when looked at in that manner.
While we're at it, how about I show you a New York State law that prevents citizenship from being acquired by the children of transient aliens?
Dear me! How could New York have passed such a law when being "born on the soil" is all that is required for citizenship? Someone should tell them that they were wrong when they passed that law back in 1845!
Nice strawman. Since I just gave you two major exceptions to birthright citizenship, just how can I be arguing for a “Hard rule of “born on the soil””? The point you refuse to address is that slaves and Indians were two constitutionally unique exceptions. The case law including supreme court rulings explain exactly why they are unique in the eyes of the court.
You also fail to address the issue that some Indian children were natural born citizens before the 14th Amendment because their parents had legally recognized ways to become naturalized American citizens.
The 14th Amendment had no effect on those Indians that were already American citizens. Elk v. Wilkins explains that only those Indians that were under a special jurisdiction were not made citizens - but those Indians belonging to tribes that paid taxes to the Federal government were citizens in accordance with the 14A.
So there were three citizenship possibilities for Indians right after the 14th Amendment:
1. Natural born citizens born to naturalized American citizens prior to the 14th Amendment.
2. Natural born citizens regardless of status of parents because they belonged to a tribe under American Jurisdiction.
3. Not an American citizen due to membership in a tribe not under American jurisdiction.
As for your New York law - isn't it still that way?
I am a legal resident of Rhode Island because I live here. I am also a US citizen.
In your example, it says that you have to live in New York to be a resident (citizen) of New York. Just like today. It says nothing about US citizenship though. So someone passing through New York when born is a US citizen but becomes a legal resident in the state where his parents eventually take him back to where they live. In your example, if that child of a transient alien was born in a neighboring state (thus becoming a US citizen) and then settled to live in New York, he would be a New York citizen according to section 5.2