<Long Discussion> What the framers of the 14th Amendment meant to accomplish
My point/BLUF: While the 14th Amendment was written to secure citizenship for formerly enslaved people, the official 1866 congressional transcripts prove the framers explicitly debated and chose broad, universal language to guarantee absolute birthright citizenship for everyone born on U.S. soil. Yes intent was to protect former slaves but the framers also deliberately chose broad, direct, powerful language to ensure subsequent actions could not water it down. They also knew the language was broad and protected more than former slaves. That is 100% deliberate.
It's interesting watching the debate around the 14th amendment take place on national media and around on social media. The debate never seems to be in good faith because of the cherry picking of facts and twisting the intent.
"The 14th amendment is meant to give freed slaves citizenship, not every illegal immigrant". This is my favorite one. Because it is patently false. Yes the framers of the 14th amendment did intentionally set out to give the freed slaves and their children citizenship. But also keep in mind this is a reconstruction era amendment. They were also worried about Southern States enacting laws to deny citizenship as well as the basic rights granted by the bill of rights to former slaves and creating a caste system in society.
Initially the 14th amendment was written in a way that made it seem like too much power was being conferred on the Federal Government and taken away too much power from the states.
> "The Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure to the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and to all persons in the several States equal protection in the rights of life, liberty, and property."
The intent was to ensure the states did not strip away citizen rights or abridge their rights. It was not something most were comfortable with so they went the other route.
> "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge... nor shall any State deprive any person..."
Instead of conferring the power on congress, they rewrote it to explicitly state that states will not have to power to deny rights to citizens. Again...the concern being how former slaves would be treated in the south.
Now congress realized they had another issue to address. The constitution never actually defined what made someone a citizen of the US. There were references to citizens but no actual definition. In order to bypass Dred Scott which actually ruled slaves/blacks as an inferior class of people who could never be U.S. citizens. The citizenship clause of the 14th was purposefully written to crush Dred Scott, and ensure courts could not strip away rights from an entire segment of people. That is the power in amending the constitution with broad and powerful language. You make the intent clear and strong so that the courts and legislative bodies cannot strip away what was intended. The language landed on was purposeful.
> "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
Written this way to make it clear who would be entitled to citizenship without leaving the door open for States, Congress, or Courts to strip away those rights due to ambiguities. The subject to jurisdiction part was also deliberate because it did provide some exceptions. Foreign Diplomats. Invading Armies. Native Americans.
If the 14th Amendment had automatically made every Native American baby born within US borders an American citizen, it would have effectively overridden tribal sovereignty by forcing US citizenship onto people who belonged to independent nations.
For foreign diplomats, under international law, diplomats serving in foreign capitals are considered extensions of their home countries. Because of "diplomatic immunity," a British or French ambassador living in Washington, D.C., cannot be arrested, taxed, or sued under American law. If an ambassador's wife gave birth while they were stationed in the US, that baby was legally born on US soil. But because the parents were immune to American laws, the child wasn't truly "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
Foreign invading armies are obvious. They owe no allegiance to the US and therefore laws would not apply to them.
Congress debated all of these points while in session. Their intent was very clear in the debates. Provide an iron clad framework to guarantee citizenship for former slaves, without giving future legislators, states, justices an opportunity to chip away at that through laws or legal rulings. How do we know this? Because it is all documented word for word in the transcripts of the 1866 Congressional Globe for the 39th Congress, 1st Session.
The initial floor debates from February, where John Bingham fought for this protective framework against pushback from representatives like Robert Hale and Charles Eldridge, are recorded in Part 2, pages 1083 to 1095. The explicit explanation of why the text was rewritten into a direct, ironclad restriction on state power is found in Part 3, pages 2764 to 2766, during Senator Jacob Howard's introduction speech. Finally, the literal proof that everyone understood the universal scope of the language is preserved in Part 4, pages 2890 to 2893, which documents the late May debates where opponents like Senator Edgar Cowan tried to narrow the clause by explicitly complaining about the children of Chinese immigrants and Gypsies, only for the authors to firmly reject those arguments and keep the birthright definition absolute.
So yes....14th amendment was meant to guarantee the rights of slaves. True. But the framers also knew about the other groups it would also extend the protections and guarantees to. It purposefully codified a broad right to citizenship and they knew it as documented in the debates. It also documents how important they thought it was for the language to be broad as to not create different classes of citizens which would play into reconstruction south intent to abridge the rights of former slaves as much as possible.
The amendment wasn't perfect. Jim Crow laws still successfully existed for many decades afterwards.....but it did guarantee the rights at the federal level. They debated all of the points open eyed and informed. And they still chose to pass the broad language.