1.) from a legal standpoint i don't think it's that far of a stretch to interpret the text of the 14th amendment (born in or naturalized to the United States, and SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION there of)to positively infer that for the birth to qualify then the presence of the child and the parents would have to be in accordance with the laws of said jurisdiction.  

 

2.) from a political standpoint, this is overkill and unnecessarily getting in the weeds.  if you build the wall or close the border by other means then this problem goes away without having a protracted pissing contest with the Supreme Court.  

 

3.) I wish people read the plain text of the 1st amendment before banning religious expressions in the public square.  

 

4.) I and others supporting stronger immigration enforcement have also said that a reasonable compromise would be to leave the current interpretation in tact but not extend special privilege to the parents after the birth of the child in circumvention of immigration law.

---