There is no comparison between this and Roe v Wade.
This is a direct statement in the Constitution and a direct power given to Congress.
Roe v Wade is the famous emanation of a penumbra...the entire idea being made up out of thin air.
There is an EXACT comparison between this and Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade is based on a deliberate misapplication of the 14th amendment. (Didn't you know that?)
Anchor baby citizenship is likewise based on a deliberate misapplication of the 14th amendment. Different sections of it to be sure, but still from the same amendment.
This is a direct statement in the Constitution and a direct power given to Congress.
There is a direct statement in the Constitution saying that Congress has the power to Naturalize, but you aren't going for naturalization, you are going for them having the ability to change the laws of nature by congressional whim.
Your theory allows for congress to pass a law declaring anyone born in China to Chinese parents is a "natural born citizen." Can congress pass such a law? Sure they can! And you would be out there demanding that we all be reasonable because congress passed a law! On the other hand, maybe that would finally wake you up to the fact that Congress can't change the meaning of a constitutional requirement.
Roe v Wade is the famous emanation of a penumbra...the entire idea being made up out of thin air.
Of the fourth amendment, and forcibly applied to the states through the power of the fourteenth amendment. This is the sort of crap you end up with when you don't hold people to correct interpretations of Constitutional law.