Limit Birthright Citizenship by Trump administration now leans on a 141-year-old Supreme Court ruling to challenge birthright citizenship. Specifically, it cites Elk v. Wilkins (1884), a case that once denied citizenship to a Native American man.
In 1880, Omaha election official Charles Wilkins refused to register John Elk, a Winnebago tribal member, to vote. As a result, Elk sued, arguing he had severed tribal ties and deserved citizenship. However, the Supreme Court ruled against him, stating Native Americans did not automatically qualify for birthright citizenship.
Now, accordingly, Solicitor General D. John Sauer references Elk to defend Trump’s Executive Order 14160. Furthermore, Sauer argues that the ruling proves that being born on US. soil alone does not guarantee citizenship. Additionally, the order seeks to restrict automatic citizenship to children with at least one US. citizen or lawful permanent resident parent.
Nevertheless, legal scholars widely reject this argument. Monte Mills, Director of the Native American Law Center at the University of Washington, consequently calls the government’s reliance on Elk deeply ironic. Moreover, Leonard Fineday of the National Congress of American Indians states the application is “a misreading and misunderstanding.”
Meanwhile, challengers point instead to United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). In that case, the Court granted citizenship to a San Francisco-born man of Chinese heritage. Notably, both rulings came from Justice Horace Gray, who later clarified that Elk applied strictly to tribal members.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on April 1, 2026, in Trump v. Barbara. Therefore, a final ruling could reshape American citizenship law before July 2026.
“Sources: NBC News, Constitution Center, OPB, The Fulcrum, American Bar Association“
Recent News:
Nick Cannon: Democrats Are ‘Party of KKK,’ Supports Trump
Iran Attacks U.S. Base in Saudi Arabia, 12 Troops Hurt
Sony Raises PS5 Prices Due to Global Economic Pressures
