Congress has passed legislation, several times, making and changing the rules for Birthright Citizenship.
Congress has full power to do so, and such power of Congress has never been challenged by any Court.
True, but Birthright Citizenship is Naturalization at birth, [jus soli] citizenship.
It is NOT Natural-born, [jus sanguinis] citizenship.
I have given multiple quotes from the founding generation and beyond.
I have given multiple quotes from those you, yourself quoted as legal authorities such as Tucker and Rawle.
Yet you still persist in acting as if Congress has the ability to determine the limits of its own power despite all the Founders' writings to the contrary.
The only question is......why?
Are you so insecure about your decision-making ability that you refuse to assimilate information and draw your own conclusions, or is it just easier for you to acquiesce to the will of an entity that has perverted its Original Intent to protect our rights and not abridge them?
-----
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
That the common law of England, and every statute of that kingdom, made for the security of the life, liberty, or property of the subject, before the settlement of the British colonies, respectively, so far as the same were applicable to the nature of their situation and circumstances, respectively, were brought over to America, by the first settlers of the colonies, respectively; and remained in full force therein, until repealed, altered, or amended by the legislative authority of the colonies, respectively; or by the constitutional acts of the same, when they became sovereign and independent states.and earlier:
We may fairly infer from all that has been said that the common law of England stands precisely upon the same footing in the federal government, and courts of the United States, as such, as the civil and ecclesiastical laws stand upon in England: That is to say, it’s maxims and rules of proceeding are to be adhered to, whenever the written law is silent, in cases of a similar, or analogous nature, the cognizance whereof is by the constitution vested in the federal courts; it may govern and direct the course of proceeding, in such cases, but cannot give jurisdiction in any case, where jurisdiction is not expressly given by the constitution.If you read your own Tucker quote, you'll note that he is applying it to municipal law, and specifically excludes those cases where jurisdiction is given by the Constitution. Nice try.