Inside US constitution

In the years after the American Civil War, the United States made three amendments to its National Constitution. These amendments established rights for African-Americans. One of the amendments abolished slavery. Another granted African-American men the right to vote. The 14th Amendment granted African-Americans the right to citizenship. Interestingly, the 14th Amendment does not specifically mention African-Americans, Black people, race, or former slaves. Instead, it introduced the concept of birthright citizenship. This means being born in the US makes you a citizen of the US.

In 2025, on his first day as president, Donald Trump signed an executive order to end birthright citizenship for children of those temporarily or unlawfully in the US. Multiple federal judges blocked this order, one noting that birthright citizenship is a foundation of US democracy. It's unclear how this will resolve if the Trump Administration will back down or if the Supreme Court will support them. Trump questioned the 14th Amendment's provision that allows children born in the US to undocumented immigrants to automatically gain citizenship.

Currently, 40% of Americans believe children of undocumented immigrants should not receive birthright citizenship. This debate over the 14th Amendment has been ongoing for nearly 200 years, focusing on who should receive citizenship. Originally, the 14th Amendment aimed to provide citizenship to freed slaves, not to foreign nationals. Questions arise about what the law truly states about birthright citizenship and why Americans continue to debate it.

The original US Constitution said nothing about citizenship, inheriting the concept from English common law. This legal assumption eventually became formalized through court rulings and amendments. The 1857 Dred Scott Decision stated that African-Americans could not be citizens, which contributed to the Civil War. After the war, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and later the 14th Amendment to establish birthright citizenship. This amendment declares all persons born or naturalized in the US, and subject to its jurisdiction, are US citizens.

Congressional debates showed an understanding that children of immigrants would become citizens at birth. Despite passing with a majority, not everyone supported the 14th Amendment. Dissatisfaction with the concept of birthright citizenship persists. In the late 19th century, the Chinese Exclusion Act prevented Chinese immigrants from becoming citizens. However, their US-born children remained citizens under the 14th Amendment.

The Supreme Court upheld this in the 1898 case of Wong Kim Ark, affirming that birthright citizenship applies to nearly everyone born in the US. This remains the legal consensus, though not everyone agrees. In the 1980s and 1990s, the issue resurfaced as the number of undocumented immigrants rose. Some Republican lawmakers argued against birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants.

The 14th Amendment was ratified under conditions imposed on Southern states post-Civil War, seen as both a law and a treaty marking the nation's new start. Today, debates continue, with a majority of Americans supporting birthright citizenship. The final decision may once again fall to the US Supreme Court, which has historically upheld birthright citizenship. We'll see how events unfold this time.

The question of who qualifies as a citizen, who is eligible to become one, and whose children may claim citizenship has long been a contentious issue in the United States. These debates have, at times, fractured the nation. In the mid-19th century, such disputes contributed to the secession of Southern states and ultimately led to the Civil War. One of the major objectives of the Union during the war was to abolish slavery and dismantle the associated two-tiered social system. Following the Union’s victory, the federal government sought to overturn the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866—the first American law to affirm that all individuals born in the United States are citizens.

However, this initiative faced immediate challenges. President Andrew Johnson opposed the Act, expressing concern that it would grant citizenship not only to African Americans but also to groups he deemed undesirable, such as the Romani people and Chinese immigrants. Despite his objections, Congress overrode the presidential veto and enacted the law. Yet another issue persisted: laws passed by Congress can be repealed or altered by future legislatures. To solidify the principle of birthright citizenship, lawmakers drafted what would become the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

The 14th Amendment states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." This provision permanently enshrined birthright citizenship in the Constitution. However, it also introduced the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which has become a focal point of legal and political debate. For instance, questions have arisen about whether children born in the U.S. to non-citizen immigrants are truly subject to U.S. jurisdiction. While the amendment itself does not explicitly clarify this, the congressional debates at the time offer valuable insight.

During those debates, one senator questioned whether this amendment would extend citizenship to children of Chinese immigrants. Another senator affirmed that it would, stating that the child of an Asian immigrant is just as much a citizen as the child of a European immigrant. These records indicate that the lawmakers understood and intended for birthright citizenship to apply to children of immigrants, a principle that was ultimately adopted into the Constitution with broad congressional support—though not unanimous, as some lawmakers, particularly those concerned about Chinese immigrants, withheld their support.

This historical tension reemerged in the decades that followed. In 1882, reflecting rising anti-Chinese sentiment amid a growing population of Chinese laborers, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. This law prohibited Chinese immigrants from becoming U.S. citizens, though it did not address the citizenship status of their U.S.-born children. Initially set to last ten years, the law became the first of several exclusionary acts that remained in effect until 1943.

In this context, the case of Wong Kim Ark emerged. A native of San Francisco, Wong traveled to China to visit family and was denied reentry into the U.S. upon his return. He argued that he was born in the United States and was therefore a citizen. His case reached the Supreme Court, offering a key test of the 14th Amendment. The central question was whether a person born in the U.S. to Chinese immigrant parents, who themselves were not citizens, could be considered "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S.

In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled in Wong Kim Ark's favor. The justices concluded that there are only three categories of individuals in the U.S. who are not subject to its jurisdiction: foreign diplomats, certain Native American tribes, and occupying foreign forces. Based on the historical understanding of the 14th Amendment and congressional debate records, the Court affirmed that nearly everyone born on U.S. soil—including children of immigrants—is indeed subject to U.S. jurisdiction and therefore entitled to citizenship. This interpretation has formed the legal consensus for over a century.

Nonetheless, legal consensus does not always align with public opinion. Beginning in the 1980s and 1990s, as the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. increased, birthright citizenship reemerged as a divisive political issue. Some lawmakers—particularly from the Republican Party—argued that children born to undocumented immigrants should not be granted automatic citizenship, invoking the jurisdiction clause as a basis for exclusion. This debate continues to the present day.

It is important to note that even at its inception, the 14th Amendment faced resistance. After the Civil War, it was approved by Congress but required ratification by three-quarters of the states. Many former Confederate states initially refused to ratify it. Congress responded by making ratification a condition for readmission to the Union. These states, having lost the war, were compelled to accept the terms of peace—including the recognition of birthright citizenship.

In this way, the 14th Amendment is more than just a legal provision; it represents a foundational shift in the nation's values following a period of intense division and conflict. Today, as in the past, birthright citizenship remains a topic of national conversation. While a majority of Americans support its continued application, some leaders—including current and former presidents—have expressed opposition. Ultimately, it appears that the Supreme Court may once again be called upon to reaffirm or reinterpret the meaning of the 14th Amendment, just as it did over a century ago.