There is no debate, and framing it as such is disingenuous. The interpretation not “popular”, it’s been adjudicated in courts time and time again, for well over

There is no debate, and framing it as such is disingenuous. The interpretation not “popular”, it’s been adjudicated in courts time and time again, for well over a hundred years, and there are basically no exceptions to the birthright clause of the amendment. Of course this doesn’t strictly guarantee the current Supreme Court will follow precedent, but given the fact it’s part of the constitution and not just a law, and that it’s been in multiple court cases with a lot of precedent, I assume they would reject that interpretation and make it clear to change it requires another amendment, which is extremely unlikely in the current government.