Elk v. Wilkins
Legal Issues
BrynoDC Coverage 3 videos
Overview
Overview
John Elk was a Native American who had left his tribe, moved to Omaha, and lived as a citizen. Paid taxes, acted in every way as a member of civil society. When he tried to register to vote, the registrar turned him away. Elk argued the Fourteenth Amendment's citizenship clause covered him. The Supreme Court disagreed: all persons born or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States was meant to address former slaves, and Native Americans born into tribal nations were not born subject to federal jurisdiction in the way required. Congress fixed the gap in 1924 with the Indian Citizenship Act. Bryan covers Elk as a case study in how the 14th Amendment's citizenship language was read narrowly, and how the birthright citizenship debate has roots in this specific dispute over what subject to the jurisdiction thereof actually means.
The Conclusion
Conclusion
Elk v. Wilkins established the cramped reading of the Fourteenth Amendment's "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause that would constrain birthright citizenship doctrine for over a century. The Court held that Native Americans born into tribal nations were not automatically citizens, despite living as fully integrated members of society. A gap Congress did not close until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support