Do we make treaties with the British? If so, Brits are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
Obama was born a Brit.
Obama was born a Brit.
Fallacy. The children born here of non-citizen parents have always been US citizens. It doesn't matter whether another country also extends citizenship to them or not.
He had an American mother. But even if both of his parents had been un-naturalized British immigrants, and even if the laws of England therefore made him a British citizen by birth, he would still be a natural born US citizen.
You might not like that, but that's the way it is.
As far as "dual citizenship" is concerned, that doesn't matter either. 3 of our first 4 Presidents were dual citizens of France, while serving as President. Nobody cared.
Just as nobody cared when John Charles Fremont, the first Republican candidate for President, ran for the nation's highest office while proudly touting that he was the US-born son of a French citizen who never naturalized and never intended to.
As far as the point you're trying to make here, it's completely invalid.
Trumbull was clear that Indians born IN THE TRIBES were not subject to the full jurisdiction of the United States. They were PARTIALLY subject to US jurisdiction, because they were on United States land.
That's what the entire "subject to the complete jurisdiction" discussion was all about.
But Trumbull was equally clear that when those "wild Indians" left their tribes, their de facto separate nations, and came to dwell among the white man, in United States society, they BECAME subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States, and their children born in US society were citizens.
Similarly, the children of British people in Britain were not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States. In fact, they weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at all.
But when British people came and lived among us, they became subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States, just as members of Indian tribes who came and lived among us became subject to our complete jurisdiction.
So I understand the argument you're trying to make here, but it's completely invalid.