Accept?

Option 1: Yes ✅

Option2: Let’s play a game!

Yes, that was the opinion of the Supreme Court in 1898. This is a different SC and, as we’ve already seen, are perfectly willing to overturn precedent. From the dissent:

In other words, the Fourteenth Amendment does not exclude from citizenship by birth children born in the United States of parents permanently located therein, and who might themselves become citizens; nor, on the other hand, does it arbitrarily make citizens of children born in the United States of parents who, according to the will of their native gov.

My point is… you don’t actually know why they wrote that clause because it’s not entirely clear and, thus, subject to further debate at this new court.

Welcome to US constitutional law!

So, why did they write it?

Say what you will about Trump, but he sure knows how to get us to learn about the Constitution!

That phase seems to say you have to be solely subject to the jurisdiction of the US. I.e., that you couldn’t also later claim to be a citizen (or subject to laws of) another nation.

At least that’s what an article I read said, which wasn’t written in direct response to this EO.