Fact Check: "Court ruled Thomas was not born 'in the United States' under the 14th Amendment."
What We Know
The claim that a court ruled Jermaine Thomas was not born "in the United States" under the 14th Amendment stems from a legal case concerning his citizenship status. Thomas was born on a U.S. military base in Germany, and he argued that this should grant him citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States" (U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1) (source-1). However, the court found that being born on a military base abroad does not meet the criteria of being born "in the United States" as required by the 14th Amendment (source-8).
Analysis
The ruling in Thomas's case is significant because it highlights the complexities of citizenship laws as they pertain to individuals born outside the continental United States. The court's decision is based on interpretations of the 14th Amendment, particularly the phrase "in the United States." Legal precedents, such as the Supreme Court's ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), have established that citizenship is generally granted to those born on U.S. soil, but exceptions exist for those born in U.S. territories or military bases abroad (source-4; source-6).
The ruling regarding Thomas's citizenship status was made by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied his petition for review, thus affirming that his birth on a military base in Germany does not equate to being born "in the United States" under the 14th Amendment (source-3). This interpretation aligns with the legal understanding that citizenship is not automatically conferred to individuals born on military installations outside the U.S.
Conclusion
The claim that a court ruled Jermaine Thomas was not born "in the United States" under the 14th Amendment is False. The court's ruling is based on established legal interpretations of the 14th Amendment, which do not recognize births on military bases abroad as equivalent to being born "in the United States." Therefore, while the court did rule against Thomas's claim to citizenship, it did so based on legal definitions and precedents rather than a blanket statement about his birthplace.
Sources
- No. 15-889 In the Supreme Court of the United States link
- PDF Nos. 24A884, 24A885, 24A886 - Supreme Court of the United States link
- PDF United States Court of Appeals FILED link
- Supreme Court Limits Judges' Ability to Issue Nationwide Injunctions link
- La Grande Pharmacie De Catalogne - Pages Jaunes link
- Read the full Supreme Court ruling in the birthright citizenship case link
- Pharmacie Grande Pharmacie Lafayette de Catalogne à … link
- Jermaine Thomas Case Sparks Debate on Citizenship Rights link
