Latest Breaking News

The “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” qualifier was placed to exclude tribal Indians who were seen as primarily subject to the jurisdiction of their respective tribes. I agree that it was most likely worded to exclude only tribal Indians, but they did choose this wording instead of the “excluding Indians not taxed” language of section 2 of the amendment, which means it might have been intended to be broader, narrower, or more ambiguous. Legislative records are persuasive but not controlling in Constitutional law, partially because it’s pretty hard to pin down the precise intent from the debates. If the administration can win the argument that some babies born here are primarily under the jurisdiction of the non-citizen mother’s sovereign nation as is their mother, they might unfortunately get a foot in the door. I think it’s very much a long shot, but I also think that we cannot wholly rely on precedential interpretations for what we think is a an easy plain language or legislative record understanding of an act of Congress. I believe the legal arguments put forth by TheNYT and others are undeniably strong, but what I believe is not determinative. That decision will be made by at least 5 of the members of the USSC.