Wrong.<quoted text>your first sentence screwed you, only citizens are subject to the jurisdiction, thereof. See, 14t Citizenship Clause.
"Although the congressional debate concerning § 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment was limited, that debate clearly confirms the understanding that the phrase "within its jurisdiction" was intended in a broad sense to offer the guarantee of equal protection to ALL within a State's boundaries, and to all upon whom the State would impose the obligations of its laws. Indeed, it appears from those debates that Congress, by using the phrase "person within its jurisdiction," sought expressly to ensure that the equal protection of the laws was provided to the ALIEN POPULATION. Representative Bingham reported to the House the draft resolution of the Joint Committee of Fifteen on Reconstruction (H. R. 63) that was to become the Fourteenth Amendment. Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 1033 (1866)."
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 214 (1982)(emphasis added)
Need More? Okay
"The Amendment [14th], in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of ALL OTHER PERSONS, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. EVERY CITIZEN OR SUBJECT OF ANOTHER COUNTRY, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION, OF THE UNITED STATES. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke, in Calvin's Case, 7 Rep. 6a, "strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;" and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, "if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle." United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 693 (1898))(emphasis added)
Question: what is your problem?