Trump v. Barbara · ¶472
First, it gives the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship test a meaning that plainly differs from that in the Civil Rights Act, even though it is beyond any reasonable dispute that Congress did no such thing. Accord, ante, at 26–31, 63–64 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). To justify its departure from the Civil Rights Act, the Court argues that the Act “raises more questions than answers” and that the Fourteenth Amendment “‘better’ expresses the views of the Reconstruction Congress.” Ante, at 24. But, as I see it, deciding whether someone is “subject to any foreign power” raises far fewer questions than deciding whether that person is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. The Court’s commitment to avoiding the straightforward text of the Civil Rights Act strongly suggests that something is amiss.Read in context ›
slip opinion, revised 7/01/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.