Federal Judge Grants Citizenship to American Samoans

The ruling upends a century of racist caselaw.

The flag of American Samoa.sezer ozger/iStock Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A Utah federal judge on Thursday ruled that people born in the US territory of American Samoa are entitled to US citizenship. American Samoans were the only group of people excluded from birthright citizenship—the principle under which those born in the United States automatically become American citizens.

American Samoans’ unique legal status has been challenged more than once in recent years. The Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to anyone born on US soil, whether a state or a territory. But the federal government has also explicitly granted citizenship by statute to the people of other US territories, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. It never did so for the approximately 55,000 American Samoans. This disadvantages American Samoans—who are categorized officially and on their passports as non-citizen nationals—in a number of ways. As Mother Jones reported back in 2015:

The increasing number of American Samoans living stateside are ineligible for many federal and state government jobs and benefits, including many military jobs, despite serving in the military at high rates. They cannot vote or serve on juries. In many places, they cannot own firearms. They can apply for US citizenship—but in order to do so, they must leave American Samoa during the months- or years-long process, uprooting their lives and leaving their families and community behind while they wait for a decision.

Over the last few years, a handful of American Samoans living in US states have challenged their status as noncitizens. The US government has argued in each case that American Samoa is not considered to be within the United States for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment. But on Thursday, Judge Clark Waddoups decided in favor of three American Samoan plaintiffs, ruling that they are indeed covered by the Constitution’s grant of birthright citizenship. In doing so, he rejected arguments that the US government has made under not just the Trump administration but also the Obama administration: that century-old racist caselaw precluded American Samoans from birthright citizenship. Those cases were decided in the early 20th century, when American politicians struggled with their desire to turn the US into a colonial power without welcoming nonwhite people into the country.

As Mother Jones explained:

To solve that problem, the Supreme Court came up with a bizarre, racially minded solution. The court invented two categories of territory; the Constitution applied fully in “incorporated territories,” such as Arizona, which were settled mostly by white people and destined for statehood, while much of the Constitution did not apply in “unincorporated territories,” such as American Samoa, which were not considered candidates for statehood, largely because of their racial and ethnic makeup.

Justice Henry Brown—famous as the author of Plessy v. Ferguson, which gave the court’s blessing to segregation—refers to the inhabitants of the new territories as “savage” and “alien races” in the Insular Cases. Brown contended that Congress would treat the territories well because it was guided by “certain principles of natural justice inherent in the Anglo-Saxon character.” His colleague, Justice Edward White, hypothesized in one case that granting citizenship to an “uncivilized race” in a new territory would “inflict grave detriment on the United States” from “the immediate bestowal of citizenship on those absolutely unfit to receive it.”

Waddoups’ decision is the first to conclude that these earlier cases do not allow the US government to deny citizenship to American Samoans. In 2015 and 2016, a similar legal effort failed after federal judges found that the government can deny citizenship to some people born in the US. In 2016, the Supreme Court refused to take the case, showing little appetite for a fight over birthright citizenship. Perhaps it will now get a chance to reconsider.

 

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate