The SCOTUS did not rule that diplomats were not subject to the laws of the United States because of "diplomatic immunity" please actually read the decision.
SCOTUS has NEVER directly ruled on whether illegals are covered by Amendment XIV.
The whole persons discussed in the 14th Amendment were women, children, assessed Indians and other non-voters and this point was made clear in the debate over passage of the Amendment. Again: look it up. It's publicly available.
I thought we had Constitutionalists at FR who believed in original intent, not some idiocy the ACLU wants to pretend is part of the document through tortured logic and sophistry. There is no precedent for considering illegals as part of the enumeration of the Census. Like the slave power of the nineteenth century, it's another gimmick to give more political power to the slave masters. Conservatives -- and actual libertarians (not liberals who just want to be able to smoke dope legally) -- who're interested in the rule of law shouldn't take advocacy positions on behalf of the lawless. Neither should they supply millions more willing voters to the statists.
Here is the context of the 14th Amendment: it is a point-by-point answer to the preposterous definition of American citizenship claimed by Chief Justice Taney in the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision. It is nothing more or less. In the debate over the 14th Amendment, proponents specifically denied that it could be applied to refugees, migrants, tourists, business visitors or other foreign nationals.
You want to live in a fantasyland where the Founders and post Civil War Republicans envisioned the United States allowing millions of foreign nationals to settle in the country and claim all the rights of Americans, go right ahead. But don't claim the Constitution as written or as Amended at the time supports your decision. It doesn't. Peddle your liberal crap elsewhere. If twelve million Mexicans had invaded the United States in 1867 they wouldn't have lived long enough to be counted in a Census. Those who managed to survive by going into hiding wouldn't have been marked down as "whole persons" by any Federal employee. We got where we are because our fore-bearers didn't have their heads up their @sses with respect to national sovereignty like the open borders liberals and "libertarians" do.
Translation: I can't back up anything I said, so I'll just bluster.
There is no precedent for considering illegals as part of the enumeration of the Census.
Aliens have been counted in every Census for apportionment purposes since the ratification of the 14th Amendment.
You want to live in a fantasyland where the Founders and post Civil War Republicans envisioned the United States allowing millions of foreign nationals to settle in the country and claim all the rights of Americans, go right ahead. But don't claim the Constitution as written or as Amended at the time supports your decision. It doesn't. Peddle your liberal crap elsewhere. If twelve million Mexicans had invaded the United States in 1867 they wouldn't have lived long enough to be counted in a Census. Those who managed to survive by going into hiding wouldn't have been marked down as "whole persons" by any Federal employee.
There was no such thing as an "illegal alien" in 1868, because the U.S. had no immigration laws until 1875. But the U.S. did have millions of immigrants in the 19th Century, both before and after 1875, and all were counted in the Census.