Law
Fact-checked

At MyLawQuestions, we're committed to delivering accurate, trustworthy information. Our expert-authored content is rigorously fact-checked and sourced from credible authorities. Discover how we uphold the highest standards in providing you with reliable knowledge.

Learn more...

What Does "Subject to the Jurisdiction" Mean?

Terry Masters
Terry Masters

Subject to the jurisdiction means that a legal entity, such as a court or the government of a country, has the right to exert physical control over as well as apply and enforce its laws against a person. It is a stipulation contained in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that defines who is eligible for citizenship. The precise meaning of the phrase has been the subject of debate by scholars and lawmakers, and has been defined in particular situations by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution confers automatic citizenship on anyone who is "born or naturalized within the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Establishing whether or not a person was born or naturalized in the U.S. has historically been relatively easy. The question of whether a person born or naturalized in the U.S. is also subject to its jurisdiction has been less clear when applied to certain populations.

The term "subject to jurisdiction" is part of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and defines who is eligible for citizenship.
The term "subject to jurisdiction" is part of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and defines who is eligible for citizenship.

In court cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that it does not apply to children of diplomats, ministers, consuls, or embassy staff. As foreign nationals in the U.S. on the business of their governments, the parents and children owe their allegiance to their home country. They are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., and are immune from most laws and from prosecution.

The United States Supreme Court has issued rulings defining who is "subject to the jurisdiction."
The United States Supreme Court has issued rulings defining who is "subject to the jurisdiction."

A child born in the U.S. to parents who are not on assignment by a foreign government is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and is considered a citizen. The parents could be traveling in the U.S. on vacation or in the process of legal or illegal immigration. In legal terms, the distinguishing point is not whether the parents are citizens of another country, but whether the parents are active agents of a foreign government, immune from the laws of the U.S. If the parents are in the U.S. of their own free will, the child born in the U.S. is considered a U.S. citizen.

The Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. law does not apply to children of consuls or embassy staff who are foreign nationals.
The Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. law does not apply to children of consuls or embassy staff who are foreign nationals.

This interpretation of the subject to the jurisdiction part of the citizenship clause is hotly debated. It grants automatic U.S. citizenship to children who are born in the U.S. to parents who are citizens of another country. The loophole effectively allows illegal immigrants to have children in the country who automatically become citizens, making it much more complicated to deport families with mixed legal status. Opponents of this interpretation argue that the illegal parents are no more subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. than the diplomat, since the U.S. would deport them back to their own country rather than exert legal jurisdiction over them, and the children should have the same status as the parents despite their birth on U.S. soil.

Discussion Comments

anon1004976

I believe it begs credulity to think that a non-citizen gives birth to a child who automatically becomes a citizen. If the parents are not citizens of the United States, but of Mexico, then their offspring is a citizen of Mexico. If you think about it, the 14th amendment was to confer onto freed slaves citizen status, thereby conferring onto their children citizenship. It is not to confer onto the children of illegal aliens citizenship, because when the parent is caught they are deported immediately.

anon1003690

Framer of the Fourteenth Amendments first section, John Bingham, said Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes meant “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” If this statute merely reaffirmed the old common law rule of citizenship by birth then the condition of the parents would be entirely irrelevant.

Both Sen. Trumbull and Sen. Howard provide the answer, with Trumbull declaring:

The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

Sen. Trumbull further restates the goal of the language: “It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens…” Note that Trumbull does not say temporarily within our jurisdiction, but “completely within our jurisdiction”.

So no, it is not "subject to interpretation"

Post your comments
Login:
Forgot password?
Register:
    • The term "subject to jurisdiction" is part of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and defines who is eligible for citizenship.
      By: Dana S. Rothstein
      The term "subject to jurisdiction" is part of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and defines who is eligible for citizenship.
    • The United States Supreme Court has issued rulings defining who is "subject to the jurisdiction."
      By: Bastos
      The United States Supreme Court has issued rulings defining who is "subject to the jurisdiction."
    • The Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. law does not apply to children of consuls or embassy staff who are foreign nationals.
      By: Alex3
      The Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. law does not apply to children of consuls or embassy staff who are foreign nationals.