Lawsuits filed over anchor babies.

[CeMar_Clone]

Trump wants to stop birthright citizenship. I personally know of a couple from India that used an anchor baby to solve their immigration problems, they should have been deported. So Trump believes that anchor babies are not constitutional. I have read the 14the amendment, and it does not seem real clear. There is a requirement that the baby is subject to the jurisdiction of the USA. If the parents are illegal aliens, then they in reality could be subject to the jurisdiction of the country they came from. Babies born to diplomats in this country are NOT citizens of the USA, and can not be anchor babies. When the democrats bring this lawsuit, they call the parents immigrants, which they are not, they are correctly identified as illegal aliens. To be an immigrant you must come here lawfully. So my guess is the SCOTUS must determine what "subject to the jurisdiction" actually means. If someone can define this definition constitutionally, please enlighten me. One of the reasons given by the AG's that are suing, is that it is precedent, but this means nothing to me, as the SCOTUS on average overturns precedent twice a month. What matters is to get it right, not to maintain "precedent". So what would be the correct constitutional result of these lawsuits? Currently, there are 150k anchor babies born each year, which likely results in more than 300K people getting into the USA illegally, the parents plus the baby.