At CNN.com, Sam Erman (USC law) and Nathan Perl-Rosenthal (USC history): Not another Dred Scott case, please. From the introduction:
Emy Afalava is a loyal American and decorated veteran. He was born in American Samoa, a U.S. territory since 1900. He has been subject to American law his whole life and thinks he should be a citizen.
The Constitution would agree. The Fourteenth Amendment declares that "All persons born … in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
Yet, Afalava has been denied the right to vote because the federal government insists that he is no citizen. How can it be, in the 21st century, that Americans born on U.S. soil are denied the rights of citizenship?
The article refers to a pending case in the D.C. Circuit, in which Professors Erman and Perl-Rosenthal joined an amicus brief on behalf of citizenship scholars supporting Afalava's claim to citizenship (which I also joined). In my view Afalava's claim, as an originalist matter, is compelling.
(Thanks to Neil Weare of We the People Project for the pointer).
Posted at 9:43 AM