Which you can't do. There was nothing unconstitutional about it.
The decision falls within the plain reading of the 14th Amendment, its intention and legislative history.
Does anyone else get tired of the leftwing technique of TELLING A BALD-FACED LIE RIGHT TO YOUR FACE IN BROAD DAYLIGHT???
The intention of the 14th amendment was to ensure citizenship for freed blacks. To suggest that it's authors intended that it be used as legal cover for women pulling the anchor baby scam reveals such a breath-taking disregard for the truth, it's hard to believe ANYONE, even the most evil, america-hating, brainwashed, STUPID leftwing robot would dare offer it.
That is not an intelligent response. You are just pissed off that I have been running circles around you.
You're running circles around yourself. You are a first class dingbat.
Your argument concerning the phrase "subject to jurisdiction of the United States" was based on a misreading of the term "subject". You mistook being a national of another country with being immune to prosecution in the US.
I did nothing of the kind. Now you're resorting to straw men. My take on the misapplication of jus soli in this case has been upheld by legal scholars for a century. You don't know that, because you don't understand the case or its history.