it shows the language is not as plain or unambiguous as it seems. there is already one loophole interpreted into “within the jurisdiction of the United States”. there can be others. 1/

@mtsw.bsky.social suggests a simple, two-pronged test: “1) Are you a person? (Automatic Yes) 2) Were you born in the US?” that is simply not the case under status quo law. 2/

and, contra @fujoshi.bsky.social, “jurisdiction of the United States” does not in plain language narrowly exclude only children with diplomatic immunity. there is more than enough wiggle room in the phrase for a sympathetic Supreme Court to declare other classes not subject. /fin

(i want to be clear i say all this with the very opposite of glee. my preference would be to strip the subject-to-the-jurisdiction qualifier entirely and render @mtsw.bsky.social 2-pronged test true without exception.)