OPINION:
“Jurisdiction thereof” once meant something. Sadly, “Trump’s birthright citizenship order strains Supreme Court” (Web, May 15) seems to ignore the obligation of the court to control the forum shopping that allows partisan district court judges to usurp the authority to run the country from the executive branch.
What would happen if partisan district court judges independently decided to issue conflicting nationwide injunctions regarding abortions?
It is remarkable that some of our keenest legal minds seem to regard the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment as some meaningless addendum. Taken in context, “jurisdiction thereof” was meant to refer to former slaves who were permanent residents and being denied the rights of citizenship.
Notably, foreign citizens who are incidentally in the United States for reasons of work, visit, parole, illegal entry or birth are under the jurisdiction of foreign nations and owe allegiance to those foreign nations. Previously, naturalized citizens were required to renounce foreign citizenship.
Despite the recent and permissive allowances regarding dual citizenship, legal scholars at the time and under the circumstances of the passage of the 14th Amendment would have regarded having allegiance to two countries as an impossibility. Back then, “jurisdiction of” actually meant something.
WILLIAM T. FIDURSKI
Clark, New Jersey
Please read our comment policy before commenting.