I can't disagree, Im studying the issue and im now neutral on it the case law visited by SCOTUS in 1898 had four exclusions and being born to foreign enemies was one that the Trump Admin might use in a hostile occupation?
Perhaps Trump needs to prosecute Biden and his admin for assisting and abetting the enemy in allowing the hostile occupation, smiles?
The "Only Argument" I can see regarding the 1898 ruling below would be a Trump Admin claiming
"Enemy Forces Engaged In Hostile Occupation Of The United States Territory" will they pursue this possibly?
Exclusion: born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), was a landmark decision[4] of the U.S. Supreme Court which held that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China",[5] automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth.[6] This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.[4]
In a 6–2 decision
[120][121] issued on March 28, 1898,
[122] the Supreme Court held that Wong Kim Ark had acquired U.S. citizenship at birth and that "the American citizenship which Wong Kim Ark acquired by birth within the United States has not been lost or taken away by anything happening since his birth."
[123] The opinion of the Court was written by Associate Justice
Horace Gray and was joined by Associate Justices
David J. Brewer,
Henry B. Brown,
George Shiras Jr.,
Edward Douglass White, and
Rufus W. Peckham.
[124]
Upholding the concept of
jus soli (citizenship based on place of birth),
[125] the Court held that the Citizenship Clause needed to be interpreted in light of English common law,
[1] which had included as
subjects virtually all native-born children,
excluding only those who were born to foreign rulers or diplomats, born on foreign public ships, or born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory.[3][126][127] The court's majority held that the
subject to the jurisdiction phrase in the Citizenship Clause excluded from U.S. citizenship only those persons covered by one of these three exceptions
(plus a fourth "single additional exception"—namely, that Indian tribes "not taxed" were not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction).
