Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Having read the Senate debate on the amendment to grant citizenship to what would become the 14th amendment, I can't disagree more.

They were absolutely aware that is what it. Indeed, they stated it outright:

> The proposition before us … relates simply in that respect to the children begotten of Chinese parents in California, and it is proposed to declare that they shall be citizens. … I am in favor of doing so. … We are entirely ready to accept the provision proposed in this constitutional amendment, that the children born here of Mongolian parents shall be declared by the Constitution of the United States to be entitled to civil rights and to equal protection before the law with others.

- Senator John Conness (R-CA), May 29, 1866 during Senate debates on citizenship amendment introduced by Senator Jacob Howard (R-MI)

The only real change came when they worried that citizenship would be extended to Indians in tribes we had treaties saying we wouldn't do just that leading to a change that excluded them.






Conness wasn't an author of the amendment, and was an immigration advocate as part of a Machiavellian strategy to lock out the Democrats in Reconstruction-era America. I agree with you, though, there certainly were other opinions on what those words meant, and the actual author doesn't do himself any favors by trying to tread right on the line to ensure the amendment passed. In any case, SCOTUS will eventually weigh in, and probably just settle the question, at least for now. It's a pity that the argument is about just the one phrase, because the arguments about the wisdom of Jus Soli policies are much more interesting.



Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: