Trump v. Barbara · ¶394

Beyond these statements, the Court mainly emphasizes that the children of temporary visitors owed a partial “allegiance” to and were owed partial “protection” from the sovereign. See, e.g., ante, at 10, 17–19. That (undisputed) fact does not demonstrate that the children of these visitors were citizens. See Part I–B–2–b, supra. To the contrary, Senator Trumbull explained that the Civil Rights Act was written to avoid this very misunderstanding: The Act said “not subject to any foreign power” instead of “owing allegiance” to the United States precisely because temporary visitors owed a partial allegiance to the United States, and he did not want anyone to mistakenly conclude that the Act included the children of temporary visitors. Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., at 572. The language chosen thus excluded temporary sojourners, who “continue[d] to owe allegiance to [their] native…

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