There are three criteria for being defined as a citizen in the letter of the Fourteenth Amendment:
1) All persons ... born in the United States
2) All persons ... naturalized in the United States
3) All persons ... subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
The first two conditions are OR -- if one, the other, or both are met, the condition applies. Babies born in the United States, regardless of their parentage, qualify under the first condition. The second condition is an AND. It has to be met along with one or both of the previous conditions. Babies born of parents who are in this country illegally are still subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Therefore, babies born in the United States, regardless of parentage, are citizens of the United States. That is a syllogistic conclusion that cannot be refuted by logic.
However, it does not take into account the INTENT of the authors of the Amendment, which, arguably, did not confer citizenship on the children of people in the country illegally, or of parents who were not themselves citizens. The courts would have to decide that matter, and precedent has not looked kindly on exclusion.
Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you the realities. The law has little use for wishful thinking.
All persons living in the jurisdiction of the U.S. ( except diplomats) are subject( are held accountable) to our laws . Does it make anyone in our jurisdiction a citizens( owes allegiance to ), of course not. This is the problem , you are still confusing a SUBJECT( citizen) with anyone held accountable for ( subject). This concept that children of illegals is fairly new ( 1980’s). In the 1950’s the U.S. deported over a million illegals and their children ( born here) as they were not ‘granted’ citizenship. If what you believe is true about the 14th amendment , why has it not been allowed until the 1980’s? The Supreme Court has always stated that allegiance is required to be a U.S. Citizen. The court has always stated that allegiance is gained from your parents. Recently a low court did draw the ame conclusion as your post, but no court even the Supreme Court has the authority to over rule the U.S. constitution.The only Constitutional thing that counts is the original intent of the founding fathers And I think you know from your posting what they felt about children of illegals.
The reality is that the ‘wise latina’ and the other liberals on the SCOTUS would almost certainly rule that ANYONE born here is a citizen. It would be a fight to prevent them from ruling that ANYONE, ANYWHERE is a US citizen, regardless of where they were born and where they live - all in the interest of fairness.
I’m absolutely certain that citizenship by birth regardless of circumstance is NOT part of the Constitution. Getting the SCOTUS to rule IAW my views is probably impossible, given the make-up of the court.
Until we win at the ballot box, repeatedly, for 20+ years, the courts will give conservatives very few victories on anything.