Trump v. Barbara · ¶188
Once a person became domiciled in a place, he was considered no longer subject to any foreign power. A person was “subject” to the government of where he was “domiciled.” The Pizarro, 2 Wheat., at 246; see also Gilman v. Gilman, 52 Me. 165, 174 (1863); Inhabitants of Abington, 40 Mass., at 177–178. When a person traveled abroad, he remained subject to the power of his home nation—much like an American who travels abroad today remains subject to the power of this Government. As this Court explained, if a person “goes into a foreign country” on a “temporary” visit, he remains subject to the power of his home country. Murray v. Schooner Charming Betsy, 2 Cranch 64, 120 (1804); accord, The Venus, 8 Cranch, at 278. When a person moved to a country permanently, by contrast, he was no longer subject to the power of the country from which he originated: “[T]hose who reside[d]” in a new nation…Read in context ›
slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.