This is not a typo. Of course it is the 14th Amendment that contains the
citizenship clause and so is front and center in every speech, press release,
sound bite, newspaper editorial, law review article, and tweet about the birthright
question. In a not very close second
place in the citation of legal sources on the issue is the jus soli (“right of the soil” or “law of the soil”) birthright
citizenship of the British common law, its incorporation into the American
common law, and its infamous and unprincipled treatment in antebellum courts.
Much farther behind are citations to the 13th
Amendment. In fact, a little internet research, admittedly very little, turned
up no references to the bearing of the language of the 13th
Amendment on citizenship. Yet that
amendment, which preceded the 14th by only a few months through the early
stages of the amendment process, includes the clause “subject to their
jurisdiction.” That is, subject to the jurisdiction of “the United States.” The
phrase in the 14th Amendment on which the birthright legal
revisionists base their claims is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof [the
United States].” It usually makes good
sense to suspect that two very similar legislated phrases may well be related
in meaning where the time period is the same, the social and political
circumstances the same, the drafters the same, and the voters the same.
This is surely not less so when the two pieces of legislation were closely
related part of a single political program – here, reconstruction.