Trump v. Barbara · ¶489

After the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, Supreme Court cases quickly acknowledged the interpretation set out above. Accord, ante, at 36–38 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). In the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36 (1873), the Court wrote that the Amendment’s Citizenship Clause “was intended to exclude from its operation children of . . . citi zens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” Id., at 73 (emphasis added); see also Minor v. Hap persett, 21 Wall. 162, 167–168 (1875) (expressing “doubts” about the citizenship of children who are born to non-citizen parents). And in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94 (1884), Justice Gray’s opinion for the Court held that the Citizenship Clause requires “not merely” that a person born in the United States be “subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States,” but that he be “completely subject to [the…

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