Trump v. Barbara · ¶226

The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” was a familiar way to describe the relation of a domiciliary to his home nation. See Part I–B–2–c, supra. Lawyers in America would have known that a person was “subject to the jurisdiction” of the place of his domicile. Hood, 93 Mass., at 199–200. Congressmen confirmed that the Clause should not be construed to refer to the bare territorial power that a sovereign exercises over all persons in its territory. “I understand the words here, ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,’” Senator George Williams said, “to mean fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 2897. “[T]he word ‘jurisdiction,’ as here employed,” Senator Howard explained, “ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction”—“the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to…

slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.