gloss · the reading room

Trump v. Barbara · ¶545

The Court’s interpretation also has national-security implications. Accord, ante, at 56 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). Suppose that a person’s only connection to this country is that he was born here to a mother who was present just long enough to give birth and then quickly returned to her native country. Suppose that country is a strategic adversary or enemy of the United States. Suppose the child never visited the United States while growing up and was inculcated with hatred of this country. According to the Court, that person is a citizen of the United States. He can enter and leave the country as he pleases. He can travel the world on a United States passport. Even if he plots to harm this country, he cannot be deprived of his status as a citizen, at least under current precedent. See Vance v. Ter razas, 444 U. S. 252, 259–260 (1980).
Read in context ›

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