In old times, hundreds years ago, people under the jurisdiction strictly refers to the people who are living in a country where they pay the taxes, swear allegiance to , serve the military and serve the jury duty! In that time, immigration was not a common practice in almost all countries and it is a very rare occurrence actually! The boundary/definition of jurisdiction is narrowed down to almost only the citizens of the sovereign!
However, in modern times, specially after the discovery of new continents, immigration becomes a popular phenomenon all over the world. As a result, immigration law was gradually modified to adopt the new situation as well as the inevitable change of the boundaries of jurisdiction.
In 1898, the decision by US Supreme Court of birthright citizenship of the Wong KimArk, was expanding the boundary of jurisdiction from citizens to permanent residents! But, several things we need to pay attention in Wong’s case.
First, Wong’s parents were Permanent Residents of the United States, having lived and worked here for about 15 years before the lawsuit.
Second, Wong and his family were not represented as diplomats of the foreign nationals! They never got subsidies, welfares or benefits from US government or foreign governments!
Third, there are none-stopped wars going on in China from 1895 to 1949!
Fourth , his parents were not eligible for U.S. citizenship due to the Naturalization Act of 1802, which barred Chinese immigrants from naturalization.
Fifth, with 14th amendment passed in 1866, Wong’s parents should be eligible for citizenship but the law of 1802 stopped them.
Wong’s parents were not US citizens that was not because they didn’t want to, instead it was because the unreasonable immigration law prevented them from obtaining the citizenship! Supreme Court knew the deadlock of bias so it granted Wong a fair trial of birthright citizenship! It simply means not only citizens’ children born in America are citizens but also the children of permanent residents are citizens too!
However, this judgement does not imply that the children of illegal migrants are eligible for citizenship!
Before the Wong’s lawsuit, we have had a citizenship fight for slaves in USA that has stimulated the 14th amendment in 1866.
In 1866, more and more people including many northern politicians were agreeing that Legal Residents within Jurisdiction should include the slaves of citizens, who are be considered as relative subjects of citizens! 14th Amendment was passed at right time to serve as the purpose to the new change of views!
Native Americans were granted U.S. citizenship on June 2, 1924, when President Calvin Coolidge signed the Indian Citizenship Act. This act declared that all noncitizen Indians born within the United States were to be recognized as U.S. citizens.
From the three cases above, we can see the changes of boundary of jurisdiction that happened in 1866, 1896 and 1924 separately. First change is to give birthright citizenship to slaves and the second change is to permanent residents and the third change is to native Americans! All cases NEVER imply that the children of illegal migrants, working visa , refugees and visitors have been given the birthright citizenship! These people neither have been required for jury duty nor for military duty to the country due to the restrictions of jurisdiction!
In UK, Individuals born in UK(excluding British colonies) receive citizenship at birth if at least one parent is a British citizen or considered to have settlement status ( Permanent Residents or Residents) in the UK. Section 2 of the Act establishes that adults born overseas are British citizens by descent if either parent is a citizen otherwise than by descent, subject to regulations. In Australia, it is similar to the UK immigration laws.
Again, none of them states that the children of illegal migrants have birthright citizenship! A jurisdiction is never defined for illegal migrants and sort of like that in past and now!
Hope it helps for clarification.