Mackenzie v. Hare
[4] During oral arguments held on November 11 and 12, 1915, Ethel MacKenzie's lawyer, Wilbur T. U'Ren, argued that congressional records show that Section 3 of the Expatriation Act of 1907 was only meant to apply to women residing outside the United States.[5] Furthermore, U'Ren cited the Supreme Court's 1856 decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, which found that the Missouri Compromise's creation of free states that assigned African-Americans rights equivalent to those of White American citizens did not confer implied US citizenship on these Black individuals.In the 1830 case Shanks v. Dupont, which occurred prior to the 1868 enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled that "marriage with an alien, whether friend or enemy, produces no dissolution of the native allegiance of the wife.[1] Responding to protests by suffragettes, such as Ethel MacKenzie herself, the 1922 Cable Act amended United States nationality law to dictate that women would retain their citizenship upon marriage to an alien as long as their husband was eligible to become a citizen.[2] The Supreme Court has repeatedly questioned its verdict in this case, such as its 2017 decision in Sessions v. Morales-Santana, which rejected sex-based differences in the residency requirement for unmarried parents to pass on their American citizenship to children born abroad."[18] In its 1958 Perez v. Brownell decision, the Supreme Court cited this case to uphold Section 401 of the Nationality Act of 1940, which considered voting in a foreign election and remaining outside of the United States in wartime to avoid military service as voluntarily renunciations of American citizenship.
Supreme Court of the United StatesExpatriation Act of 1907Edward D. WhiteJoseph McKennaOliver W. Holmes Jr.William R. DayCharles E. HughesWillis Van DevanterJoseph R. LamarMahlon PitneyJames C. McReynoldsCitizenship ClauseCable ActUnited States Supreme Courtforeign alienrenounced their American citizenshipCongressExpatriation Act of 1868US citizensrenounce their citizenshipfeudalcommon lawEnglish common lawcoverture1911 California Proposition 4Nineteenth Amendment to the US Constitutionsex-based denialvoting rights for US citizensSan FranciscoCaliforniamandamusSupreme Court of CaliforniaLucien ShawWorld War IFourteenth Amendment to the US Constitutionbirthright citizenshipDred Scott v. SandfordMissouri Compromise'sSan Francisco City AttorneyPercy V. LongNapoleonic CodeNetherlandsOttoman EmpireRussian EmpireUnited States v. Wong Kim Arkinternational lawEmperor of ChinaUlysses S. Grant'sNellie GrantWhite HouseSouthamptonEnglandUnited KingdomState of the Union55th United States Congresslegislative intentNecessary and Proper ClauseexpatriationWest VirginiaSupreme Court of AppealsHenry BrannonJames Clark McReynoldsChicago EagleUnited States consulatesuffragettesUnited States nationality lawImmigration and Nationality Act of 1965ideological restrictions on naturalization in American lawCaban v. MohammedEqual Protection ClauseHugo BlackNishikawa v. DullesPerez v. BrownellNationality Act of 1940Afroyim v. RuskWashington, D.C.United States Government Publishing OfficeNational Park ServiceAmerican Journal of International LawThe Evening StarUnited States Government Printing OfficeThe New York TimesCincinnatiThe San Francisco CallUnited States Fourteenth AmendmentSlaughter-House CasesMinor v. HappersettElk v. WilkinsRogers v. BelleiSaenz v. RoeDue Process ClauseEconomic substantivedue processMugler v. KansasAllgeyer v. LouisianaHolden v. HardyLochner v. New YorkMuller v. OregonCoppage v. KansasBuchanan v. WarleyAdams v. TannerO'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.West Coast Hotel Co. v. ParrishRight to privacyMeyer v. NebraskaPierce v. Society of SistersGriswold v. ConnecticutRoe v. WadeDoe v. BoltonBowers v. HardwickWebster v. Reproductive Health ServicesPlanned Parenthood v. CaseyLawrence v. TexasWhole Woman's Health v. HellerstedtDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health OrganizationAbortion jurisprudenceUnited States v. VuitchPlanned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthBellotti v. Baird IColautti v. FranklinBellotti v. Baird IIH. L. v. MathesonCity of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive HealthThornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & GynecologistsHodgson v. MinnesotaMazurek v. ArmstrongStenberg v. Carhart