Trump v. Barbara · ¶269
Chief Justice Fuller nonetheless dissented because he rejected the premise that Wong’s parents were domiciled here at the time of his birth. He explained that because Chinese law purported to bind Wong’s family even after they had settled here, the family “cannot . . . acquire a permanent home here, no matter what the length of their stay may be.” Id., at 731; see also id., at 725, and n. 1; see also Justice John Marshall Harlan: Lectures on Constitutional Law, in 81 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. Arguendo, at 345. Thus, Chief Justice Fuller and Justice Harlan dissented because, in their view, Wong and his parents were not actually domiciled in the United States at the time of his birth.Read in context ›
slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.