I've been debating this one mistake of theirs for years!! (famguardian.org too)
They are absolutely wrong with this one aspect, except that it helps non white men also be 'free men'. They are interpreting many aspects surrounding this issue incorrectly in my opinion. For example:
1) The 14th Amendments' use of a lower case "c" for citizen for the first time in the Constitution and the Amendments is NOT an accident, it is purposeful.
2) The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" is not Political (necessarily) and is quite possibly referring to the newly freed slaves under the 13th Amendment, that became "federal persons" under the Civil rights act.
3) The case they use:
In my opinion, this case is clearly pointing out that Federal Persons NEEDED the 14th Amendment to be "citizens of the United States". The case uses past tense... "no such definition was...", "nor had any attempt...", "it had been the occasion..." "it had been said by...", "no man was a citizen...", "except as he was...", "those therefore, who had been...", "were not citizens..."
I believe this case shows that the (new) Amendment made new "citizens" that were different than the "Citizens" of the original Constitution.
4) The 14th Amendment has persons "residing" in States. Residence is temporary. SEDM states "you cannot be domiciled on Federal Territory and be a 14th Amendment citizen."
THIS IS FALSE (IMO). Those born in the United States* AND subject to its jurisdiction are lower case "c" (14th Amendment) citizens wherever they are, and the U.S. Govt. and the courts see it the same way.
How the U.S. Govt sees it for example: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf
(2) The Court also concluded that: “The 14th Amendment affirms the
ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the
territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country,
including children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions
or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign
sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of
enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our
territory, and with the single additional exception of children of
members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their
several tribes. The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest
intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United
States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled
within the United States.” Pursuant to this ruling:
(a) Acquisition of U.S. citizenship generally is not affected by the
fact that the parents may be in the United States temporarily
or illegally; and that
(b) A child born in an immigration detention center physically
located in the United States is considered to have been born
in the United States and be subject to its jurisdiction. This is
so even if the child’s parents have not been legally admitted
to the United States and, for immigration purposes, may be
viewed as not being in the United States.