Prof. Ilan Wurman Interviewed by Washington Post About Birthright Citizenship Case at Supreme Court

Professor Ilan Wurman was interviewed by the Washington Post about an argument the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing this week that’s built in part on a post-Civil War campaign that many scholars say was steeped in racism. The case, which could redefine who is considered an American, centers on the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The Trump administration argues the 14th Amendment does not apply to people in the country illegally or on temporary visas. The government attorneys assert parents must be “domiciled” in the United States for their offspring to qualify for citizenship. If the high court agrees, and reverses the long-held interpretation, it could render hundreds of thousands of children born to immigrant parents stateless. In its argument, the Trump administration cites Alexander Porter Morse, a Confederate officer during the Civil War and a Louisiana attorney, who argued for legalized segregation in the landmark 1896 Supreme Court case that established the “separate but equal” doctrine. In addition to opposing birthright citizenship, Morse also advocated for limiting the other reconstruction amendments that abolished slavery and guaranteed Black people the right to vote. Prof. Wurman, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, said Morse and others were among many advocates who argued birth on U.S. soil should not alone guarantee citizenship. He said, “The idea that you can find a handful of racists among a number of people who made a similar argument and call the whole argument racist is a classic logical fallacy.”