United States v. Wong Kim Ark facts for kids
Quick facts for kids United States v. Wong Kim Ark |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued March 5, 8, 1897 Decided March 28, 1898 |
|
| Full case name | United States v. Wong Kim Ark |
| Citations | 169 U.S. 649 (more)
18 S.Ct. 456; 42 L.Ed. 890
|
| Prior history | Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of California; 71 F. 382 |
| Holding | |
| Children born in the United States of foreigners permanently domiciled and resident in the U.S. at the time of birth automatically acquire U.S. citizenship via the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Gray, joined by Brewer, Brown, Shiras, White, Peckham |
| Dissent | Fuller, joined by Harlan |
| McKenna took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, decided in 1898, was an important case heard by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court decided that a child born in the United States to parents from China automatically becomes a U.S. citizen. This decision was based on the Citizenship Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Contents
The Story of Wong Kim Ark
Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco, California, around 1873. His parents had moved to the U.S. from Taishan, Guangdong, China. They were not U.S. citizens because of a law from 1802 that prevented Chinese immigrants from becoming naturalized citizens. Wong Kim Ark grew up to work as a cook in San Francisco's Chinatown.
Traveling to China and Back
In 1889, Wong Kim Ark traveled to China with his parents. They decided to stay in China. While there, Wong Kim Ark got married. He returned to the United States in 1890, leaving his wife behind. She later gave birth to their first son in China. At that time, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 made it impossible for him to bring his wife to the U.S. because he was a laborer. When he arrived in San Francisco, he was allowed to enter because he was born in the U.S.
In 1894, Wong Kim Ark visited China again to see his family. He met his oldest son and his second son was conceived. But when he tried to return to San Francisco in 1895, he was stopped. Customs officials said he was not a U.S. citizen. They argued that even though he was born in the U.S., his parents were Chinese subjects, making him a Chinese subject too. Wong Kim Ark was held on ships near San Francisco for five months while his case was decided.
Why This Case Was Important
Wong Kim Ark's situation became a "test case" for the U.S. government. At the time, there was a lot of anti-Chinese feeling in the U.S. Many people wanted to weaken the Fourteenth Amendment. This amendment says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
America had always welcomed people from other countries. Chinese immigrants helped build the country, working in mines and on railways. But after a major economic downturn in 1873, many Americans lost their jobs. Chinese workers, who often worked for lower wages, were unfairly blamed. This led to violence and the Chinese Exclusion Act, which tried to stop Chinese people from coming to the U.S.
Wong Kim Ark received help from the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association. He sued the U.S. government. The main question was whether his birth in San Francisco made him a U.S. citizen. The government argued that because his parents were Chinese subjects, he was also a Chinese subject. They claimed he was not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. as the Fourteenth Amendment stated.
Many countries, like China and Japan, base citizenship on "bloodline" (Jus sanguinis). This means children get their parents' citizenship, no matter where they are born. The U.S., however, mainly uses "right of the soil" (Jus soli). This means you are a citizen if you are born in the country. The Supreme Court had to decide which rule applied to Wong Kim Ark.
The Supreme Court's Decision
Both sides in the case agreed on several key facts:
- Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco, California, in 1873.
- His parents were Chinese and subjects of the Emperor of China.
- His parents lived in the U.S. until 1890 and were not diplomats.
- Wong Kim Ark had never given up his loyalty to the United States.
- He had never done anything that would cause him to lose his citizenship.
- He visited China twice, in 1890 and 1894.
- He was allowed to enter the U.S. in 1890 but was denied entry in 1894.
- If he was a U.S. citizen, the Chinese Exclusion Acts did not apply to him.
The main question for the Court was whether the government could deny citizenship to someone born in the U.S. The Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark was an American citizen because of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Horace Gray wrote the main opinion for the Court.
Why This Case Still Matters
The case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark created a very important precedent. This means it set a rule for all future cases. It established that all children born in the United States are citizens, no matter what their parents' citizenship status is.
This ruling is still important today. For example, during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, there was discussion about children born in the U.S. to parents who are not legal residents. Because of the Wong Kim Ark decision, these children are still U.S. citizens. Changing this rule would require a Constitutional amendment, which is a very long and difficult process.
Attempts to Change the Law
In 2018, President Donald Trump talked about trying to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizens. Senator Lindsey Graham also said he would try to pass a law to do the same thing. However, neither of these attempts happened before President Trump left office in 2021.
Images for kids
-
Wong Kim Ark, from a 1904 U.S. immigration document
-
An 1894 statement by witnesses about Wong Kim Ark's identity.
-
Associate Justice Horace Gray wrote the Court's opinion.
-
Chief Justice Melville Fuller wrote the dissenting opinion.
-
Signatures of Wong Kim Ark's four sons.
