I get your point about subjects and citizens.
What the Founders meant to do (and failed) was use the Old English concept of Natural Born Citizenship.
Which means one must be born as a US citizen. AND both parents must also be born as US citizens.
There was no citizenship in old English law. English law only dealt with subjects.
The word "citizen" didn't mean in the English of that era what it means today. It meant "Dweller in a City." Citizen was literally "city denizen." Someone who lived in a city.
What people are trying to do, is to apply the Old English common law (meaning there is no written law, it's just custom) regarding "subjects", to "Citizen", and claim "Citizen" is based on old English common law.
It isn't. It's based on Vattel. He is the guy who brought the concept to America with his book, "The Law of Nations."
Which means one must be born as a US citizen. AND both parents must also be born as US citizens.
The English common law only requires you to be born on the land of the King, and you are automatically his "Subject."
They are wrongfully applying the English common law regarding "Subjects", to "Citizen."
This is where all the mistakes have crept in to this issue.