If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital beat her newborn to death, could she be tried for murder in a US court?
Yes!
Therefore she is in US jurisdiction.
If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital just slugged her newborn, could the newborn be taken away from her under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
If the Mexican mom in a Laredo hospital was high on cocaine while delivering, could her ‘coke baby’ be taken away from her under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
If newborn was the male heir to a $10 billion Mexican fortune, could he be taxed under US law?
Yes!
Therefore the baby is in US jurisdiction.
You continue to make the same superficial mistake.
As far as being taxed, that's not at all clear. Good luck trying to make that case.
As John Eastman explained to the Congress about the case of Hamdi:
and the Court has never actually held that anyone who happens to make it to U.S. soil can unilaterally bestow U.S. citizenship on their children merely by giving birth here.
Although such an understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment has become widespread in recent years, it is not the understanding of those who drafted the Fourteenth Amendment, or of those who ratified it, or of the leading constitutional commentators of the time.
Neither was it the understanding of the Supreme Court when the Court first considered the matter in 1872, or when it considered the matter a second time a decade later in 1884, or even when it considered the matter a third time fifteen years after that in the decision many erroneously view as interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment to mandate automatic citizenship for anyone and everyone born on U.S. soil, whether their parents were here permanently or only temporarily, legally or illegally, or might even be here as enemy combatants seeking to commit acts of terrorism against the United States and its citizens.
The True Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause
Read and educate yourself.