Trump v. Barbara · ¶379

Lynch also did not interpret the Citizenship Clause, a statute using the same language as the Citizenship Clause, or even a statute that remained in effect at the time of the Citizenship Clause. Instead, it interpreted a New York state law. The state law was replaced immediately after Lynch. See 1 Sand. Ch., at 583, n. a., 620; 1845 N. Y. Laws p. 94. If a “single, expressly limited opinion from a specialized intermediate [federal] court” does not establish a well- settled meaning that the Court can assume Congress incorporated into a federal statute that uses the same language, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U. S. 229, 252 (2026), then a single state trial equity-court decision interpreting a different law certainly does not do so.

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