Chinese persons, born out of the United States, remaining subjects of the Emperor of China, and not having become citizens of the United States,are entitled to the protection of, and owe allegiance to, the United States so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here, and are " subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the same sense as all other aliens residing in the United States. {All highlight added}It clearly makes permission to reside in the US a requirement (contrary to Brennan).
Any thoughts? I'm not a lawyer. For links and excerpts of all the above see here [Link - Post#32].
The proper way to handle Wong Kim Ark is to note that the question of citizenship for children of legal transients (no domicile), and those in the country illegally (whether domiciled or not) were not before the court, so whatever can be implied from language in Wong Kim Ark should not be taken as the rule of law for children of transients and those in the country illegally.
Wong Kim Ark is a long case, contains many statements, and is one of those cases that lends itself to support just about any proposition that GRANTS citizenship, depending on how one cherry-picks among the statements.
Lawyers are an overrated bunch. You're correct Gray did not hold that anchor babies by illegal aliens on US soil as citizens.
I would agree that by coming here illegally you do not have ‘permission’ to be here OR to have a baby here, and if you do you cannot force the USA to make the baby a citizen.