You even have it in your reply..."At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
TWO parents, both citizens.
No, that is just losing birther blather. You need to truncate what was stated by the Court, rip it out of context, and ignore all else that was said, and make believe Wong Kim Ark does not exist, to reach your bogus result.
"At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens." Minor v. Happersett, (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.
There was no question that Virginia Minor was born a citizen. It was a jointly stipulated fact. If a child is born in the United States to two illegal aliens in a detention center, both awaiting deportation, the child is nevertheless born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction, and pursuant to the Constitution is born a citizen of the United States. No citizen parent is required. The child born in the United States, of alien parents, is born a United States citizen.
https://fam.state.gov/FAM/08FAM/08FAM030101.html
8 FAM 300
(U) U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY8 FAM 301
(U) U.S. CITIZENSHIP8 FAM 301.1
(U) ACQUISITION BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES(CT:CITZ-1; 06-27-2018)
(Office of Origin: CA/PPT/S/A)* FAM 301.1-1 (U) INTRODUCTION
(CT:CITZ-1; 06-27-2018). . .
d. “Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States”: All children born in and subject, at the time of birth, to the jurisdiction of the United States acquire U.S. citizenship at birth even if their parents were in the United States illegally at the time of birth:(1) The U.S. Supreme Court examined at length the theories and legal precedents on which the U.S. citizenship laws are based in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). In particular, the Court discussed the types of persons who are subject to U.S. jurisdiction. The Court affirmed that a child born in the United States to Chinese parents acquired U.S. citizenship even though the parents were, at the time, racially ineligible for naturalization;
(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; and
(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.
Your bogus birther blather, and sundry other bogus birth blather, was litigated to death in the Obama era.
A losing record of futility of 0-226.
https://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%2520CASE%2520LIST.pdf
The BIRTHER SCORECARD list all the cases, the result, and the result of any appeal. ALL cases were dismissed on pre-trial motions to dismiss. NONE even survived to a trial.