This is true. In fact, the author of the citizenship clause, Senator Jacob Howard specifically stated that it was not meant to apply to the children of foreigners, aliens.
Subject to the jurisdiction means subject to the complete jurisdiction.
The meaning intended by the authors of the Amendment, that was ratified as the Amendment is the correct interpretation, not someone's opinion decades after the fact. https://truthnewsnet.org/birthright-citizenship-and-the-14th-amendment/
Illegals cannot legally work in this country, nor can they vote legally, nor can they serve in the military without special dispensation, or vote or be drafted. Except in rare circumstances they cannot be charged with treason. People who are subject to the jurisdiction can do all these things. This means citizens and permanent legal residents.
If everyone born in this country is subject to the jurisdiction, then why was it necessary to pass the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 giving citizenship to the American Indians? Why was John Elk, an Indian born in this country declared not a birth citizen? Elk v Wilkins 1884
Later on, in US v Wong Kim Ark 1898
the court ruled that Wong Kim Ark was a citizen even though his parents were not US citizens. Read the actual decision, which states that Wong Kim Ark's parents maintained a domicil in this country. Maintaining a domicil, according to Black's Law, means a permanent legal residence. Exactly how a wetback, visa overstay, or temporary legal resident can maintain a PERMANENT legal residence is an interesting question.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China", automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.