-
Early Interpretations
In certain states, Black men were seen as citizens. in the quote from Amar, "some blacks had even fought in Washington’s army, and had in several states been eligible to vote on the Constitution itself in." Although this was not the case in all states. -
Dread Scott V. Sanford
Dred Scott was a slave seeking freedom due to being taken to a free state by his master. The results described by Akhil Amar state that, "Chief Justice Taney concluded that Scott was not a citizen of any state for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction because the Constitution implicitly limited both state and national citizenship on racial grounds." -
Civil Rights Act of 1866
This Act passed by Congress changed the interpretation of citizens in the U.S. The quote from Amar's writing explains who this included, "thereby affirming a rule of citizenship by birth that did not depend on race. The only two textual exceptions to this rule of birthright citizenship were for American-born persons “subject to any foreign power” and for “Indians not taxed.” -
Supreme court's inconsistency's
Although given the ability to force equality in private instances of racial violence, systems, and privately owned businesses ( hotels, restaurants, etc. ), the supreme court lacked follow through. Amar says that, "These Supreme Court decisions—including the infamous 1883 Civil Rights Cases—were inconsistent with the Fourteenth Amendment’s text and history." -
Plessey V. Ferguson
The Supreme court in this time frame clarified the ideals of citizenship and determined the equality in the Citizenship Clause. Amar states, "the Citizenship Clause as guaranteeing that “[a]ll citizens are equal before the law.” This is what truly sets into motion the ideal of equality based off of shared country rather then shared race, and enhanced the birthright idea.