Trump v. Barbara · ¶52

This new theory focused on the parents’ status, not the child’s. It was only if a child’s parents were “domiciled in the United States,” they argued, that the child was “inter nationally subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,” as the Citizenship Clause (they said) required. Id., §12, at 41–42 (emphasis added); see also A. Morse, A Treatise on Citizenship 248 (1881). These writers acknowledged that the common law took a different view, see id., at 238, and n. 1, and acknowledged “that the language of the [F]ourteenth [A]mendment . . . is very broad,” A. Morse, Citizenship of Children of Aliens Born in the United States, 30 Albany L. J. 420 (1884). But they insisted that jus soli had been “universally” rejected by other nations and had not been made part of the Constitution. Ibid.

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