AGAIN, you IGNORE the fact that Ark WAS NOT decided on jus soli, BUT SOLELY on the 14th Amendment.
However, jus soli is a component of the 14th Amendment, so I give you half-credit.
The Court DID NOT declare that birth jus soli makes one a "natural-born citizen", but it DID declare that birth jus soli makes one a "citizen".
To say ANYTHING ELSE about the Ark decision makes you a liar.
Correct; to say otherwise would be misrepresenting my position, which is the Court decided that the 14th Amendment was based on the much older, pre-existing position of jus soli and thus was foundational in the legal decision.
The Court DID NOT declare that birth jus soli makes one a "natural-born citizen", but it DID declare that birth jus soli makes one a "citizen".
Sure, and I have not argued otherwise.
To say ANYTHING ELSE about the Ark decision makes you a liar.
Which is the position of most in this thread who claim some undefined position regarding NBC status without even the references of Ark. Rather, liar may be too strong, but delusional perhaps fits better.
We already know from the citizenship act of the very first Congress, passed in 1790, that the very men who set up these United States did not hold to the position of Vattel; witness their explicit declaration of those born overseas to two citizen parents were natural born citizens (yes, they use that very phrase, natural born citizen).
So we have settled case law of a Supreme Court decision (upheld by later cases as well) that positively references the English common law position of jus soli in the majority decision. And we have a law passed by the very first Congress that explicitly runs counter to Vattel.
Yet somehow the "proper" position is that Vattel is the our foundation when it comes to citizenship? That takes a pretty willful suspension of logic and reason.