-
Ratification of the 14th Amendment
The 14th Amendment was officially adopted on July 9, 1868, following the Civil War. Its Citizenship Clause conferred citizenship upon all individuals born or naturalized in the United States, encompassing those African Americans who were formerly enslaved. This was an essential move in establishing the definition of U.S. citizenship and reversed the Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) ruling, which had refused citizenship to African Americans. -
The Slaughter-House Cases
In the Slaughter-House Cases, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause within the 14th Amendment. The Court determined that the 14th Amendment did not offer widespread protection of civil rights, but instead concentrated on safeguarding the rights of national citizenship rather than those of state citizenship. This ruling diminished the federal government's ability to uphold individual rights in relation to state actions. -
United States v. Wong Kim Ark
In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court upheld the principle that individuals born in the United States to non-citizen parents are recognized as U.S. citizens under the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. This ruling broadened the understanding of birthright citizenship to encompass the offspring of immigrant parents. -
Cable Act
The Cable Act of 1922 provided citizenship to women who wed foreign nationals, but it also stated that women could forfeit their citizenship if they married non-citizen men from specific countries. Although it is not directly connected to the 14th Amendment, this legislation illustrated changing perspectives on women's rights to citizenship and the understanding of U.S. citizenship. -
Perez v. Brownell
In the case of Perez v. Brownell, the Supreme Court determined that a naturalized citizen could forfeit their citizenship if they willingly renounced it, even if they were born in the United States. This decision sparked discussions regarding the stability of citizenship rights granted by the 14th Amendment, particularly the Citizenship Clause. -
Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments
The Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1967 did not make direct changes to the 14th Amendment, but they were crucial in defining U.S. citizenship by eliminating biased quotas related to race and nationality. This adjustment increased the opportunities for a greater number of individuals to attain U.S. citizenship, which is consistent with the 14th Amendment's values of equality. -
Plyler v. Doe
In Plyler v. Doe, the Supreme Court determined that states are required to offer public education to children, regardless of their immigration status. This decision strengthened the principle that the protections granted by the 14th Amendment, particularly the Equal Protection Clause, are applicable to everyone in the U.S., including those who are undocumented. -
Zadvydas v. Davis
In Zadvydas v. Davis, the Supreme Court decided that holding lawful immigrants indefinitely in detention infringed on the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. This ruling confirmed that non-citizens who hold legal status in the U.S. have the right to constitutional safeguards. -
United States v. Windsor
In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court declared the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional, determining that it infringed upon the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the 14th Amendment. The ruling expanded federal benefits to same-sex married couples, underscoring the principle that the 14th Amendment ensures equal protection and due process for all individuals.