The crux of the WKA issue is that his parents could never become citizens by statute of Congress; however, his status - by virtue of birth - was set by the 14th Amendment. Congressional statute does not override Constitutional rights. Whether you agree with Grey or not, it is the law of the land, and has been upheld by subsequent SC decisions.
“main purpose” of the clause “was to establish the citizenship of the negro” and that “[t]he phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”
Justice Steven Field, joined by Chief Justice Chase and Justices Swayne and Bradley in dissent from the principal holding of the case, likewise acknowledged that the clause was designed to remove any doubts about the constitutionality of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which provided that all persons born in the United States were as a result citizens both of the United States and of the state in which they resided, provided they were not at the time subjects of any foreign power.
Therefore, it was unanimous that the definition of ‘subject to the jurisdiction did not mean mere local, it meant complete, local & political. The only way to gain political was through descent from the parent or by consent as this is the law of nature which is the law of nations.
Tell me, what law did congress pass after the 14th & the expatriation act which clarified that the US did NOT adhere to dual citizenship, the changed the meaning of subject to the jurisdiction. What gave Gray the authority to overturn his ruling that declared the 14th amendment to in fact be constitutional in its wording that denied citizenship to children born owing allegiance to a foreign power. You always avoid the fact that the intent of the law can not be determined without looking into the history of when the law was made and Grey in Elk, quoted Slaughterhouse, which quoted the framers of the Amendment.
And the 14th Amendment ONLY made him a citizen - not necessarily "natural born" unless and until the Supreme Court explicitly states so. To date, they never have ...
That is what this is all about.
No one is saying that WKA was not a citizen, well maybe a few, but the court did not say he was a natural born citizen, and even if they had, it would have been dicta, because that status was not at issue, as it never would be except in a Presidential eligibility case. That is the only time being a "natural born citizen" is required. Otherwise citizens, natural born, born in the country, born outside to citizens, etc, all the same before the law. Naturalized citizens do have "time a citizen" requirements, but for those naturalized at birth outside the country and those born in the country of alien parents, those are met by merely meeting the age requirements. The residency requirements apply to all citizens, regardless of how they became so.