American citizenship has been defined, officially, by one’s birthplace. It must also include one’s sense of belonging.
This week’s Supreme Court ruling has answered, at least for now, the constitutional question: Who qualifies for citizenship under the law? But a more difficult question remains: What does citizenship require once it is conferred?
Recommended Stories
Over time, American citizenship has increasingly been treated as unconditional — detached from civic integration, institutional loyalty, or accountability. Somewhere along the way, “American citizen” has become a watered-down status with the absence of expectation for assimilation.
In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito argues, “Careful analysis of the text of the 14th Amendment and the process that led to its adoption shows that it does not degrade the concept of U.S. citizenship in this way. Instead, he claims the 14th Amendment confers citizenship “on only those children who, at birth, owe allegiance solely to this country.”
The 6-3 decision cements America’s new rule to offer citizenship to everyone born on U.S. soil. However, when not paired with expectations of integrating into shared civic values and loyalty to the Constitution, this allows immigrants to take advantage of freedoms, even if they aren’t willing to support the framework that makes those freedoms possible.
Citizenship once carried expectations: to bring people together under a single civic creed, to eliminate inherited social classes, and unite different groups through shared laws, loyalty, and mutual responsibilities.
In his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas very explicitly includes the purpose of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment to provide citizenship to those who had adopted this civic creed.
“Blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans,” Thomas argues. “They had no other homeland, owed no allegiance to any foreign power, and were subject to no other authority.”
Over time, rewards and motivations have changed. Now, the privilege of our American homeland and allegiance is expedited based not on one’s true domicile, or home, but rather on sheer geography — a visitor’s place of birth.
The authors of the 14th Amendment certainly did not understand citizenship as the watered-down legal entitlement it now represents. Local, foreign traditions differ from American liberal democratic values, as civic norms are learned behaviors shaped by institutional experience. They do not automatically reset when an individual enters our constitutional republic.
As expectations of civic assimilation and shared norms weaken, public discourse becomes less anchored in a common civic framework and more shaped by competing interpretations of rights, identity, and obligation. This shift is not confined to any single individual or group. It reflects a broader structural tension in a diverse democracy where shared expectations of citizenship are less clearly defined.
What links debates over enforcement, immigration policy, and political controversy is this underlying uncertainty: What does U.S. citizenship require in practice — beyond legal status alone?
If citizenship is treated as merely an entitlement, divorced from constitutional loyalty or civic obligation, institutions will become reactive, law enforcement will grow tentative, and political rhetoric will become overly cautious — all shaped by concerns about perception and image.
George Washington, in his farewell address, emphasized that adhering to the name American extends far beyond the verbatim.
“The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.”
These sentiments were later echoed by Frederick Douglass for the purpose of offering black Americans their deserved citizenship — a citizenship that rests on the principle that America is one’s settled home.
AMERICA’S SUICIDE PACT: WHY THE REPUBLIC MAY NOT SURVIVE ANOTHER 250 YEARS
Our young nation has survived 250 years by requiring loyalty of its citizens to its constitutional order and patriotic norms. If it is to survive 250 more, citizenship must be reclaimed as a covenant, rights must carry responsibilities, and freedom must demand allegiance.
God bless America, our home sweet home.
Sophia Aros is a NeW Student Media Fellow, a Fordham University graduate, and a UVA Batten student pursuing a Master’s in Public Policy.
