Summary in seconds: This article traces the evolving story of U.S. citizenship—from its early definition as a privilege for “free white persons” to a broader, hard-fought ideal of inclusion. It explores how race, gender, and politics shaped who could belong, highlighting key milestones such as the 14th Amendment, women’s citizenship reforms, and modern debates over birthright citizenship. Ultimately, it shows that American citizenship has never been fixed but continually redefined through struggle, law, and social change.
How belonging in America has been defined, contested, and expanded over time
Citizenship in the United States has never stood still. From the very beginning, the question of who belongs has been debated, rewritten, and fought over—through laws, court rulings, and social movements.
In the country’s early years, citizenship was not a formal legal label so much as a living civic practice. It meant showing up: men gathering in town halls to debate, vote, and shape their communities. As Alexis de Tocqueville noted in 1835, this culture of active participation kept American democracy “sturdy.”
But over time, citizenship evolved. It became less about showing up and more about a legal status—something that granted rights and demanded responsibilities.
What never changed, however, was the struggle over its meaning. At every stage, citizenship in America has been a story of contest and redefinition—driven by race, gender, politics, and power.
Early Exclusions and the First Citizenship Laws
When Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1790, it set the first boundaries of American citizenship—reserving it for “any alien being a free white person” who had lived in the United States for two years. The Naturalization Act of 1802 extended that residency to five years, but the message remained clear: citizenship was a privilege for a few, not a right for all.
From the start, whole groups were left out:
- Native Americans were excluded entirely until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which finally recognized them as citizens at birth.
- Asian immigrants faced sweeping legal barriers, including the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Later court rulings—Ozawa v. United States (1922) and U.S. v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923)—upheld these exclusions by declaring that Japanese and Indian immigrants could not become citizens.
- Racial restrictions would not be fully lifted until the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.
The Fight for Black Citizenship
No struggle shaped the meaning of citizenship more deeply than that of African Americans. In the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Black people—enslaved or free—could not be citizens. That ruling was overturned after the Civil War by the 14th Amendment (1868), which promised that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States” were citizens. It was a revolutionary statement—but one whose promise was undermined almost immediately by Jim Crow laws, voter suppression, and systemic discrimination.
It would take nearly a century, and the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to secure the political rights that the Constitution had guaranteed on paper. The fight for full citizenship, however, continued well beyond that—into schools, workplaces, and every corner of public life.
Women and Citizenship by Marriage
For much of U.S. history, women’s citizenship was treated as an extension of their husbands.’ Under the Expatriation Act of 1907, an American woman automatically lost her citizenship if she married a non-citizen. Meanwhile, a foreign woman gained citizenship simply by marrying an American man.
That began to change with the Cable Act of 1922, which recognized women as independent citizens with the right to naturalize on their own. The Equal Nationality Act of 1934 went a step further, allowing U.S. citizen mothers to pass citizenship to their children born abroad—a right previously reserved only for fathers.
Step by step, women began reclaiming the idea that citizenship was something they owned, not something conferred through marriage.
Federal Oversight and Institutional Change
As immigration increased, the federal government gradually took the reins of the naturalization process:
- 1891: Creation of the Bureau of Immigration brought the first federal oversight.
- 1906: The Naturalization Act of 1906 standardized the process and required English proficiency.
- 1933: The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was formed, centralizing immigration functions.
- 1952: The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) abolished racial restrictions but maintained national-origins quotas.
- 1990: The Immigration Act of 1990 modernized the visa system and introduced new categories, including employment-based and diversity visas.
- 2003: Immigration services were reorganized under U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), separating benefits administration from enforcement.
Each of these shifts reflected a growing awareness that citizenship was not just personal—it was institutional, shaped by the policies and bureaucracies that decided who could belong.
Birthright Citizenship and Modern Debates
The principle of birthright citizenship—that anyone born on U.S. soil is a citizen—was confirmed by the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The ruling established that even children of non-citizen parents were citizens by birth.
Today, the 14th Amendment continues to guarantee this right, extending to people born in U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
Yet debates persist. Some politicians have sought to limit birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, arguing over what it truly means to be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. These arguments echo a long and familiar theme in American history: the tension between inclusion and exclusion, between who belongs and who does not.
Conclusion
The history of U.S. citizenship is not a steady march toward inclusion—it is a cycle of progress and backlash, of expansion and resistance. At different moments, entire groups—Native Americans, African Americans, Asian immigrants, and women—were excluded, only to fight their way into the circle of belonging.
The result is a nation that has grown more inclusive, yet still wrestles with what citizenship really means. Because in the end, citizenship is not just a legal status written on paper. It is a living reflection of America’s ongoing struggle with democracy, identity, and equality—questions as vital today as they were in 1790.
Our next editorial will examine President Trump’s efforts to reinterpret the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship.
Sources:
1. Bill Chappell. “What is birthright citizenship and what happens after the Supreme Court ruling?” National, 27 June, 2025.
2. Luis Barrucho. “Trump wants to end birthright citizenship. Where do other countries stand?” BBC World Service, 27 June, 2025.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c983g6zpz28o
3. Multiple Authors. “History of immigration and nationality law in the United States.” Wikipedia, 9 October, 2025.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immigration_and_nationality_law_in_the_United_States
4. Rachel Treisman. “Trump wants to end birthright citizenship. That’s easier said than done.” NPR, May 15, 2025
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/23/nx-s1-5270572/birthright-citizenship-trump-executive-order