Citizenship Theories, Immigration and Nationality Act Section 309 & Nguyen v. INS: How the Supreme Court Got It Wrong

Authors

Rachel Baskin, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

The note critiques the Supreme Court's decision in *Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS*, which upheld the constitutionality of Section 309 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This provision imposes additional requirements for U.S. citizen fathers, unlike mothers, to transmit citizenship to children born abroad. The author argues that the Court's ruling perpetuates gender discrimination and undermines the deeper meaning of citizenship, which should encompass membership, belonging, and substantive ties to the nation rather than mere legal formalities. The analysis draws on republican, communitarian, and liberal theories of citizenship to advocate for a more inclusive and gender-neutral approach to citizenship transmission.

Disciplines

Constitutional Law | Fourteenth Amendment | Law

Recommended Citation

Rachel Baskin, Citizenship Theories, Immigration and Nationality Act Section 309 & Nguyen v. INS: How the Supreme Court Got It Wrong, 3 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J. 869 (2006).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cplpej/vol3/iss3/10