Trump v. Barbara · ¶359

First, if the Court were right that the Citizenship Clause did not require domicile, then it would have increased dual nationality, which would have provoked concern among 19th-century Americans. “The United States has long recognized the general undesirability of dual allegiances.” Sa vorgnan, 338 U. S., at 500. “[A]t the time of ratification, exclusive loyalty to the United States had long been a fundamental element of American citizenship.” Brief for Professor Richard Epstein as Amicus Curiae 12; see also Part I–B–2–a, supra. The view at the time was that a nation should “as soon tolerate a man with two wives as a man with two countries.” Letter from G. Bancroft to Lord Palmerston (Jan. 26, 1849), S. Exec. Doc. No. 38, 36th Cong., 1st Sess., at 164 (1860); see also P. Spiro, Dual Nationality and the Meaning of Citizenship, 46 Emory L. Rev. 1411, 1430 (1997).

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