美利坚合众国宪法第十四条修正案 (Chinese Wikipedia)
Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "美利坚合众国宪法第十四条修正案" in Chinese language version.
refsWebsite
Global rank
Chinese rank
1st place
1st place
696th place
2,022nd place
low place
low place
405th place
987th place
3rd place
8th place
6th place
4th place
1,478th place
2,525th place
24th place
29th place
332nd place
526th place
7th place
31st place
low place
low place
105th place
269th place
7,147th place
low place
6,288th place
1,632nd place
low place
low place
34th place
129th place
low place
low place
791st place
1,198th place
low place
low place
918th place
1,784th place
8,043rd place
low place
3,811th place
7,287th place
40th place
100th place
446th place
1,043rd place
129th place
436th place
228th place
597th place
1,948th place
4,114th place
22nd place
110th place
3,322nd place
6,894th place
amazon.com
- Stephenson, D. The Waite Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy. ABC-CLIO. 2003-11-12: 147 [2013-09-04]. ISBN 978-1576078297. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Bogen, David. Privileges and Immunities: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution. Praeger. 2003-04-30: 104 [2013-09-05]. ASIN B001ECQKR0. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
america.gov
- The Civil War And Reconstruction. [2012-10-20]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-20）.
apnews.com
- Donald Trump banned from Colorado ballot in historic ruling by state's Supreme Court. AP News. 2023-12-19 [2023-12-20]. （原始内容存档于2023-12-20） （英语）.
archive.org
- 任东来; 陈伟; 白雪峰; Charles J. McClain; Laurene Wu McClain. 美国宪政历程：影响美国的25个司法大案. 中国法制出版社. 2004-01. ISBN 7-80182-138-6.
- See Oppenheim, Lassa, International Law, A Treatise, I (Peace), London, New York, Bombay: Longmans, Green, Co.: 368, 1905 [2013-09-05]
- See Munde, Charles, The Bancroft Naturalization Treaties with the German States; The United States Constitution and the Rights and Privileges of Citizens of Foreign Birth; Being a Collection of Documents and Opinions Relating to the Subject, to the Encroachment of the North-German Treaty on Our Civil Rights, and the Measures to Rebut it; An Appeal to the German-American Citizens, to the Government, Congress, Court of Claims, and the People of the United States of America, Würzburg: A. Stuber, 1868 [2013-09-05]
- There were bilateral treaties with Albania, Austria-Hungary, Baden, Bavaria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Brazil, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, El Salvador, Haiti, Hesse, Honduras, Lithuania, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Prussia, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Uruguay and Wurttemberg. For the text of the treaty with Great Britain see Convention between the United States of America and Great Britain, Relative to Naturalization, Concluded May 13, 1870, Ratifications Exchanged August 10, 1870, Proclaimed by the President of the United States, September 16, 1870, Treaties and Convention between the United States and Other Powers, Since July 4, 1776, Revised Edition, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office: 405, 1873 [2013-09-05]. Norway and Sweden were included in a single treaty signed in 1869 when the two countries were joined in a personal union under the Swedish monarchy. The Interamerican Convention of 1906 covered Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Panama and Uruguay. For the text of the 1906 Inter-American Convention see Status of Naturalized Persons who Return to Country Of Origin (Inter-American), Convention signed at Rio de Janeiro, August 13, 1906, Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States 1776-1949 (compiled under the direction of Charles. I. Bevans), 1 (Multilateral) 1776-1917, Washington, DC: The Department of State, Government Printing Office: 544, 1968 [2013-09-05]. The treaties with each of the German states except Prussia became obsolete when the German Empire was proclaimed in 1871. The treaties with Prussia and Austria-Hungary lapsed with the American declaration of war in 1917 and were never revived. Brazil, Mexico and the United Kingdom terminated their treaties; and Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay withdrew from the 1906 convention.
- Levy, Leonard. Fourteenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights: The Incorporation Theory (American Constitutional and Legal History Series). Da Capo Press. 1970. ISBN 0-306-70029-8.
- Gerstmann, Evan. The Constitutional Underclass: Gays, Lesbians, and the Failure of Class-Based Equal Protection. University Of Chicago Press. 1999. ISBN 0-226-28860-9.
- Epstein, Lee; Walker, Thomas G. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights, Liberties, and Justice 6th. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. 2007: 775. ISBN 0-87187-613-2.
Wesberry and Reynolds made it clear that the Constitution demanded population-based representational units for the U.S. House of Representatives and both houses of state legislatures....
- T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Samuel Issacharoff. Race and Redistricting: Drawing Constitutional Lines after Shaw v. Reno. Michigan Law Review (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 3). 1993, 92 (3): 588–651. JSTOR 1289796. doi:10.2307/1289796.
archives.gov
- Pieces of History: General Robert E. Lee's Parole and Citizenship. Prologue Magazine (The National Archives). 2005, 37 (1) [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-07-30）.
books.google.com
- Goldstone, Lawrence. Inherently Unequal: The Betrayal of Equal Rights by the Supreme Court, 1865–1903. Walker & Company. 2011 [2013-09-02]. ISBN 978-0-8027-1792-4. （原始内容存档于2013-10-09）.
- Nelson, William E. The Fourteenth Amendment: From Political Principle to Judicial Doctrine. Harvard University Press. 1988: 47 [2013-09-03]. ISBN 978-0-674-04142-4. （原始内容存档于2013-10-09）.
- Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877. HarperCollins. 1988 [2013-09-02]. ISBN 978-0-06-203586-8. （原始内容存档于2021-05-05）.
- Killian, Johnny H.; et al. The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation: Analysis of Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to June 28, 2002. Government Printing Office. : 31 [2013-09-04]. ISBN 9780160723797. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Urofsky, Melvin I.;Finkelman, Paul. A March of Liberty: A Constitutional History of the United States 1 2nd. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2002 [2013-09-04]. ISBN 0-19-512635-1.
- Beatty, Jack. Age of Betrayal: The Triumph of Money in America, 1865-1900. New York: Vintage Books. 2008-04-08: 135 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 1400032423. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Curry, James A.; Riley, Richard B.; Battiston, Richard M. 6. Constitutional Government: The American Experience. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. 2003: 210 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 0-7872-9870-0. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Foster, James C. Bingham, John Armor. Finkleman, Paul (编). Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties. CRC Press: 145. 2006 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Failinger, Marie. Equal protection of the laws. Schultz, David Andrew (编). The Encyclopedia of American Law. Infobase: 152–153. 2009 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Johnson, John W. Historic U.S. Court Cases: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. 2001-01-01: 446–447 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 978-0-415-93755-9. （原始内容存档于2020-08-01）.
britannica.com
global.britannica.com
- Bush v. Gore. Encyclopaedia Britannica. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-07-08）.
byu.edu
lawreview.byu.edu
- Cord, Robert L. The Incorporation Doctrine and Procedural Due Process Under the Fourteenth Amendment: An Overview (PDF). Brigham Young University Law Review. 1987, (3): 868 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2010-06-22）.
cnn.com
money.cnn.com
- Sahadi, Jeanne. Is the debt ceiling unconstitutional?. CNN Money. 2011-07-07 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-15）.
columbialawreview.org
- Soifer, Aviam. Federal Protection, Paternalism, and the Virtually Forgotten Prohibition of Voluntary Peonage (PDF) 112 (7). Columbia Law Review: 1614. 2012-11. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2014-03-16）.
- Graber, Mark A. Subtraction by Addition? The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments (PDF) 112 (7). Columbia Law Review: 1501-1549. 2012-11. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2015-06-10）.
cornell.edu
law.cornell.edu
- CRS Annotated Constitution. Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. [2013-06-12]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-12）.
[w]ithout doubt...denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
- Duncan v. Louisiana (Mr. Justice Black, joined by Mr. Justice Douglas, concurring). Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute. 1968-05-20 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-03-23）.
- Holmes, Oliver Wendell, Jr. 274 U.S. 200: Buck v. Bell. Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. [2013-06-12]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-12）.
supct.law.cornell.edu
- ''City of Boerne v. Flores'', Opinion of the Court, Part III-A-3. Supct.law.cornell.edu. 1997-06-25 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-07-28）.
csmonitor.com
- 14th Amendment: why birthright citizenship change 'can't be done'. Christian Science Monitor. 2010-08-10 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-13）.
doi.org
dx.doi.org
- Amar, Akhil Reed. The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. Yale Law Journal (The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6). 1992, 101 (6): 1193–1284 [2013-09-05]. JSTOR 796923. doi:10.2307/796923. （原始内容存档于2013-09-03）.
- T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Samuel Issacharoff. Race and Redistricting: Drawing Constitutional Lines after Shaw v. Reno. Michigan Law Review (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 3). 1993, 92 (3): 588–651. JSTOR 1289796. doi:10.2307/1289796.
fas.org
- Lee, Margaret. Birthright Citizenship Under the 14th Amendment of Persons Born in the United States to Alien Parents (PDF). Congressional Research Service. 2010-08-12 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2012-09-11）.
Over the last decade or so, concern about illegal immigration has sporadically led to a re-examination of a long-established tenet of U.S. citizenship, codified in the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and §301(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. §1401(a)), that a person who is born in the United States, subject to its jurisdiction, is a citizen of the United States regardless of the race, ethnicity, or alienage of the parents. [...] "some scholars argue that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment should not apply to the children of unauthorized aliens because the problem of unauthorized aliens did not exist at the time the Fourteenth Amendment was considered in Congress and ratified by the states.
findlaw.com
constitution.findlaw.com
- Sections 3 and 4: Disqualification and Public Debt. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. 1933-06-05 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- SECTIONS 3 AND 4. DISQUALIFICATION AND PUBLIC DEBT. Findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment, p. 40. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
caselaw.findlaw.com
- 294 U.S. 330 at 354. Findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-23）.
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com
- FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment, p. 40. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
google.bg
books.google.bg
- For the text of the first Bancroft treaties see Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States 1776-1949 (compiled under the direction of Charles. I. Bevans), VIII (Germany-Iran), Washington, DC: The Department of State, Government Printing Office, 1971 [2013-09-05], （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）
- There were bilateral treaties with Albania, Austria-Hungary, Baden, Bavaria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Brazil, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, El Salvador, Haiti, Hesse, Honduras, Lithuania, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Prussia, Portugal, the United Kingdom, Uruguay and Wurttemberg. For the text of the treaty with Great Britain see Convention between the United States of America and Great Britain, Relative to Naturalization, Concluded May 13, 1870, Ratifications Exchanged August 10, 1870, Proclaimed by the President of the United States, September 16, 1870, Treaties and Convention between the United States and Other Powers, Since July 4, 1776, Revised Edition, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office: 405, 1873 [2013-09-05]. Norway and Sweden were included in a single treaty signed in 1869 when the two countries were joined in a personal union under the Swedish monarchy. The Interamerican Convention of 1906 covered Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Panama and Uruguay. For the text of the 1906 Inter-American Convention see Status of Naturalized Persons who Return to Country Of Origin (Inter-American), Convention signed at Rio de Janeiro, August 13, 1906, Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States 1776-1949 (compiled under the direction of Charles. I. Bevans), 1 (Multilateral) 1776-1917, Washington, DC: The Department of State, Government Printing Office: 544, 1968 [2013-09-05]. The treaties with each of the German states except Prussia became obsolete when the German Empire was proclaimed in 1871. The treaties with Prussia and Austria-Hungary lapsed with the American declaration of war in 1917 and were never revived. Brazil, Mexico and the United Kingdom terminated their treaties; and Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay withdrew from the 1906 convention.
- For the 1937 Treaty with Lithuania see Liability for Military Service of Naturalized Persons and Persons born with Double Nationality, Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States 1776-1949 (compiled under the direction of Charles. I. Bevans), IX (Iraq-Muscat), Washington, DC: The Department of State, Government Printing Office: 690, 1972 [2013-09-05]
gpo.gov
- Amendment XIV. US Government Printing Office. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-23）.
- The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis, and Interpretation - 1992 Edition --> Amendments to the Constitution --> Seventh Amendment - Civil Trials. U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. Government Printing Office: 1464. 1992 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-14）.
- Chapter 157: The Oath As Related To Qualifications, Cannon's Precedents of the U.S. House of Representatives 6, 1936-01-01, 6 [2013-09-05], （原始内容存档于2013-06-20）
heinonline.org
- Kovalchick, Anthony. Judicial Usurpation of Legislative Power: Why Congress Must Reassert its Power to Determine What is Appropriate Legislation to Enforce the Fourteenth Amendment. Chapman Law Review. 2007-02-15, 10 (1) [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-05-03）.
highbeam.com
- Reid, Kay. Multilayered loyalties: Oregon Indian women as citizens of the land, their tribal nations, and the united States. Oregon Historical Quarterly. – 通过HighBeam Research
. 2012-09-22 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-09-04）. - Griswold v. Connecticut. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-09-05）.
- Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973) Doe v. Bolton 410 U.S. 179 (1973). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-06-10）.
- Spindelman, Marc. Surviving Lawrence v. Texas. Michigan Law Review. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2004-06-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-06-10）.
- Levy, Leonard W. Barron v. City of Baltimore 7 Peters 243 (1833). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-03-29）.
- Supreme Court Drama: Cases That Changed America. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 1978. Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2001 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Eckes, Susan B. Race-Conscious Admissions Programs: Where Do Universities Go From Gratz and Grutter?. Journal of Law and Education. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2004-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Reed v. Reed 1971. Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2001-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Karst, Kenneth L. Craig v. Boren 429 U.S. 190 (1976). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Daniels, Gilda R. Fred Gray: life, legacy, lessons. Faulkner Law Review. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2012-03-22 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Friedman, Walter. Fourteenth Amendment. Encyclopedia of African-American Culture and History. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2006-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-07-14）.
- Engel, Steven A. The McCulloch theory of the Fourteenth Amendment: City of Boerne v. Flores and the original understanding of section 5. Yale Law Journal. – 通过HighBeam Research . 1999-10-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-09）.
- Eisenberg, Theodore. Katzenbach v. Morgan 384 U.S. 641 (1966). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-09-24）.
hnn.us
- Goodman, Bonnie K. History Buzz: October 16, 2006: This Week in History. History News Network. 2006 [2009-09-08]. （原始内容存档于2009-09-08）.
17/10/1978 - Pres Carter signs bill restoring Jefferson Davis citizenship
jrank.org
law.jrank.org
- Due Process of Law – Substantive Due Process. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Thomson Gale. 1998 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-06）.
jstor.org
- Amar, Akhil Reed. The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. Yale Law Journal (The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6). 1992, 101 (6): 1193–1284 [2013-09-05]. JSTOR 796923. doi:10.2307/796923. （原始内容存档于2013-09-03）.
- T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Samuel Issacharoff. Race and Redistricting: Drawing Constitutional Lines after Shaw v. Reno. Michigan Law Review (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 3). 1993, 92 (3): 588–651. JSTOR 1289796. doi:10.2307/1289796.
justia.com
supreme.justia.com
- Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883)
- Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884)
- United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
- For example, see Perez v. Brownell, 356 U.S. 44 (1958), overruled by Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
- Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
- 444 U.S. 252 (1980)
- Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873)
- e.g., United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000)
- Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999), quote:Despite fundamentally differing views concerning the coverage of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, most notably expressed in the majority and dissenting opinions in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873), it has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel. Writing for the majority in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Miller explained that one of the privileges conferred by this Clause "is that a citizen of the United States can, of his own volition, become a citizen of any State of the Union by a bona fide residence therein, with the same rights as other citizens of that State." (emphasis added)
- McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010)
- Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578 (1897)
- Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
- Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 525 (1923)
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)
- Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887)
- Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 (1898)
- Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908)
- Wilson v. New, 243 U.S. 332 (1917)
- United States v. Doremus, 249 U.S. 86 (1919)
- West Coast Hotel v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937)
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
- Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
- Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
- 505 U.S. 845 (1992), 505 U.S. 846 (1992)
- Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
- See also Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. ___ (2009)
- Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243 (1833)
- Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis (1916). Supreme.justia.com. 1916-05-22 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-21）.
- 118 U.S. 394 (1886)
- Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880)
- Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)
- Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
- Berea College v. Kentucky, 211 U.S. 45 (1908)
- Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
- Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954)
- United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)
- Levy v. Louisiana, 361 U.S. 68 (1968)
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
- Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003)
- Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
- Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971)
- Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976)
- Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964)
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964)
- Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993)
- Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)
- League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006)
- Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974)
- Perry v. United States294 U.S. 330 (1935)
- Katzenbach v. Morgan, 384 U.S. 641 (1966)
- City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)
justice.gov
- Yoo, John. Survey of the Law of Expatriation: Memorandum Opinion for the Solicitor General. justice.gov. 2002-06-12 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-09-26）.
latimes.com
opinion.latimes.com
- Chemerinsky, Erwin. The Constitution, Obama and raising the debt ceiling. Los Angeles Times. 2013-09-05 [July 30, 2011]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-21）.
libertyfund.org
oll.libertyfund.org
- Berger, Raoul. Government by Judiciary : The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment 2nd. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1997: 58 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 0865971447. （原始内容存档于2012-10-22）.
loc.gov
memory.loc.gov
- Library of Congress, Thirty-Ninth Congress Session II. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875. Library of Congress. : 707 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
Senator Reverdy Johnson said in the debate: "Now, all this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power--for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us--shall be considered as citizens of the United States...If there are to be citizens of the United States entitled everywhere to the character of citizens of the United States, there should be some certain definition of what citizenship is, what has created the character of citizen as between himself and the United States, and the amendment says citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States."
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2897. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 572. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- 11 Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2890,2892-4,2896. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2020-03-19）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-18）.
Trumbull, during the debate, said, "What do we [the committee reporting the clause] mean by 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States'? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means." He then proceeded to expound upon what he meant by "complete jurisdiction": "Can you sue a Navajoe Indian in court?...We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction.... If we want to control the Navajoes, or any other Indians of which the Senator from Wisconsin has spoken, how do we do it? Do we pass a law to control them? Are they subject to our jurisdiction in that sense?.... Would he [Sen. Doolittle] think of punishing them for instituting among themselves their own tribal regulations? Does the Government of the United States pretend to take jurisdiction of murders and robberies and other crimes committed by one Indian upon another?... It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens."
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2895. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
Howard additionally stated the word jurisdiction meant "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now" and that the U.S. possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the person described in the amendment.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 498. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
The debate on the Civil Rights Act contained the following exchange:
Mr. Cowan: "I will ask whether it will not have the effect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies born in this country?"
Mr. Trumbull: "Undoubtedly."
...
Mr. Trumbull: "I understand that under the naturalization laws the children who are born here of parents who have not been naturalized are citizens. This is the law, as I understand it, at the present time. Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens."
Mr. Cowan: "The honorable Senator assumes that which is not the fact. The children of German parents are citizens; but Germans are not Chinese; Germans are not Australians, nor Hottentots, nor anything of the kind. That is the fallacy of his argument."
Mr. Trumbull: "If the Senator from Pennsylvania will show me in the law any distinction made between the children of German parents and the children of Asiatic parents, I may be able to appreciate the point which he makes; but the law makes no such distinction; and the child of an Asiatic is just as much of a citizen as the child of a European." - Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2891-2. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
During the debate on the Amendment, Senator John Conness of California declared, "The proposition before us, I will say, Mr. President, relates simply in that respect to the children begotten of Chinese parents in California, and it is proposed to declare that they shall be citizens. We have declared that by law [the Civil Rights Act]; now it is proposed to incorporate that same provision in the fundamental instrument of the nation. I am in favor of doing so. I voted for the proposition to declare that the children of all parentage, whatever, born in California, should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States, entitled to equal Civil Rights with other citizens."
newrepublic.com
- Rosen, Jeffrey. How Would the Supreme Court Rule on Obama Raising the Debt Ceiling Himself?. The New Republic. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-25）.
nytimes.com
- Pear, Robert. Citizenship Proposal Faces Obstacle in the Constitution. The New York Times. 1996-08-07 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-20）.
- Greenhouse, Linda. Justices Limit the Use of Race in School Plans for Integration. The New York Times. 2007-06-29 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-17）.
- Liptak, Adam. The 14th Amendment, the Debt Ceiling and a Way Out. The New York Times. 2011-07-24 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-04-04）.
In recent weeks, law professors have been trying to puzzle out the meaning and relevance of the provision. Some have joined Mr. Clinton in saying it allows Mr. Obama to ignore the debt ceiling. Others say it applies only to Congress and only to outright default on existing debts. Still others say the president may do what he wants in an emergency, with or without the authority of the 14th Amendment.
oyez.org
- Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 .
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 .
pennjcl.com
- Rodriguez, C.M. "The Second Founding: The Citizenship Clause, Original Meaning, and the Egalitarian Unity of the Fourteenth Amendment" [PDF] (PDF). U. Pa. J. Const. L. 2009, 11: 1363–1475 [2011-07-15]. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2011-07-15）.
saf.org
- Amar, Akhil Reed. The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. Yale Law Journal (The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6). 1992, 101 (6): 1193–1284 [2013-09-05]. JSTOR 796923. doi:10.2307/796923. （原始内容存档于2013-09-03）.
salon.com
- LaFantasie, Glenn. The erosion of the Civil War consensus. Salon. 2011-03-20. （原始内容存档于2013-01-01）.
scotusblog.com
- Barnett, Randy. Privileges or Immunities Clause alive again. SCOTUSblog. 2010-06-28 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-13）.
- Howe, Amy. Finally! The Fisher decision in Plain English. SCOTUSblog. 2013-06-24 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-29）.
ssrn.com
papers.ssrn.com
- Chin, Gabriel; J. Abraham, Anjali. Beyond the Supermajority: Post-Adoption Ratification of the Equality Amendments. Arizona Law Review. 2008, 50: 25 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-16）.
- Primus, Richard. Bolling Alone. Columbia Law Review. 2004-05 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-13）.
ssrn.com
- Finkelman, Paul, John Bingham and the Background to the Fourteenth Amendment. Akron Law Review, Vol. 36, No. 671, 2003 (Ssrn.com). 2009-04-02. SSRN 1120308
. - Tsesis, Alexander, The Inalienable Core of Citizenship: From Dred Scott to the Rehnquist Court. Arizona State Law Journal, Vol. 39, 2008 (Ssrn.com). SSRN 1023809 .
state.gov
travel.state.gov
- U.S. Department of State. Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality. 2008-02-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-28）.
supremecourt.gov
- 19-1392 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (06/24/2022) (PDF). 美国最高法院. [2022-06-26]. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2022-06-24）.
teachingamericanhistory.org
- Andrew Johnson. Veto of the Civil Rights Bill. teachingamericanhistory.org. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-29）.
theatlantic.com
- Our National Debt 'Shall Not Be Questioned,' the Constitution Says. The Atlantic. 2011-05-04 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-21）.
time.com
content.time.com
- Forced Busing and White Flight. Time. 1978-09-25 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-23）.
umich.edu
vpcomm.umich.edu
- Alger, Jonathan. Grutter/Gratz and Beyone: the Diversity Leadership Challenge. University of Michigan. 2003-10-11 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2011-08-13）.
usconstitution.net
- Mount, Steve. Ratification of Constitutional Amendments. 2007-01 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-02）.
washingtonpost.com
blog.washingtonpost.com
- Messner, Emily. Born in the U.S.A. (Part I), The Debate. Washington Post. 2006-03-30 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2011-11-06）.
web.archive.org
- Goldstone, Lawrence. Inherently Unequal: The Betrayal of Equal Rights by the Supreme Court, 1865–1903. Walker & Company. 2011 [2013-09-02]. ISBN 978-0-8027-1792-4. （原始内容存档于2013-10-09）.
- Nelson, William E. The Fourteenth Amendment: From Political Principle to Judicial Doctrine. Harvard University Press. 1988: 47 [2013-09-03]. ISBN 978-0-674-04142-4. （原始内容存档于2013-10-09）.
- Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877. HarperCollins. 1988 [2013-09-02]. ISBN 978-0-06-203586-8. （原始内容存档于2021-05-05）.
- Soifer, Aviam. Federal Protection, Paternalism, and the Virtually Forgotten Prohibition of Voluntary Peonage (PDF) 112 (7). Columbia Law Review: 1614. 2012-11. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2014-03-16）.
- Graber, Mark A. Subtraction by Addition? The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments (PDF) 112 (7). Columbia Law Review: 1501-1549. 2012-11. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2015-06-10）.
- The Civil War And Reconstruction. [2012-10-20]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-20）.
- Library of Congress, Thirty-Ninth Congress Session II. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Mount, Steve. Ratification of Constitutional Amendments. 2007-01 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-02）.
- A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774-1875. Library of Congress. : 707 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Killian, Johnny H.; et al. The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation: Analysis of Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to June 28, 2002. Government Printing Office. : 31 [2013-09-04]. ISBN 9780160723797. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Chin, Gabriel; J. Abraham, Anjali. Beyond the Supermajority: Post-Adoption Ratification of the Equality Amendments. Arizona Law Review. 2008, 50: 25 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-16）.
- Stephenson, D. The Waite Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy. ABC-CLIO. 2003-11-12: 147 [2013-09-04]. ISBN 978-1576078297. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Messner, Emily. Born in the U.S.A. (Part I), The Debate. Washington Post. 2006-03-30 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2011-11-06）.
- Pear, Robert. Citizenship Proposal Faces Obstacle in the Constitution. The New York Times. 1996-08-07 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-20）.
- LaFantasie, Glenn. The erosion of the Civil War consensus. Salon. 2011-03-20. （原始内容存档于2013-01-01）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
Senator Reverdy Johnson said in the debate: "Now, all this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power--for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us--shall be considered as citizens of the United States...If there are to be citizens of the United States entitled everywhere to the character of citizens of the United States, there should be some certain definition of what citizenship is, what has created the character of citizen as between himself and the United States, and the amendment says citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States."
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2897. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 572. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- 11 Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2890,2892-4,2896. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2020-03-19）.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2893. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-18）.
Trumbull, during the debate, said, "What do we [the committee reporting the clause] mean by 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States'? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means." He then proceeded to expound upon what he meant by "complete jurisdiction": "Can you sue a Navajoe Indian in court?...We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction.... If we want to control the Navajoes, or any other Indians of which the Senator from Wisconsin has spoken, how do we do it? Do we pass a law to control them? Are they subject to our jurisdiction in that sense?.... Would he [Sen. Doolittle] think of punishing them for instituting among themselves their own tribal regulations? Does the Government of the United States pretend to take jurisdiction of murders and robberies and other crimes committed by one Indian upon another?... It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens."
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, p. 2895. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
Howard additionally stated the word jurisdiction meant "the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now" and that the U.S. possessed a "full and complete jurisdiction" over the person described in the amendment.
- Reid, Kay. Multilayered loyalties: Oregon Indian women as citizens of the land, their tribal nations, and the united States. Oregon Historical Quarterly. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2012-09-22 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-09-04）.
- Lee, Margaret. Birthright Citizenship Under the 14th Amendment of Persons Born in the United States to Alien Parents (PDF). Congressional Research Service. 2010-08-12 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2012-09-11）.
Over the last decade or so, concern about illegal immigration has sporadically led to a re-examination of a long-established tenet of U.S. citizenship, codified in the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and §301(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. §1401(a)), that a person who is born in the United States, subject to its jurisdiction, is a citizen of the United States regardless of the race, ethnicity, or alienage of the parents. [...] "some scholars argue that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment should not apply to the children of unauthorized aliens because the problem of unauthorized aliens did not exist at the time the Fourteenth Amendment was considered in Congress and ratified by the states.
- Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 1, p. 498. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
The debate on the Civil Rights Act contained the following exchange:
Mr. Cowan: "I will ask whether it will not have the effect of naturalizing the children of Chinese and Gypsies born in this country?"
Mr. Trumbull: "Undoubtedly."
...
Mr. Trumbull: "I understand that under the naturalization laws the children who are born here of parents who have not been naturalized are citizens. This is the law, as I understand it, at the present time. Is not the child born in this country of German parents a citizen? I am afraid we have got very few citizens in some of the counties of good old Pennsylvania if the children born of German parents are not citizens."
Mr. Cowan: "The honorable Senator assumes that which is not the fact. The children of German parents are citizens; but Germans are not Chinese; Germans are not Australians, nor Hottentots, nor anything of the kind. That is the fallacy of his argument."
Mr. Trumbull: "If the Senator from Pennsylvania will show me in the law any distinction made between the children of German parents and the children of Asiatic parents, I may be able to appreciate the point which he makes; but the law makes no such distinction; and the child of an Asiatic is just as much of a citizen as the child of a European." - Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 39th Congress, pt. 4, pp. 2891-2. the Library of Congress. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
During the debate on the Amendment, Senator John Conness of California declared, "The proposition before us, I will say, Mr. President, relates simply in that respect to the children begotten of Chinese parents in California, and it is proposed to declare that they shall be citizens. We have declared that by law [the Civil Rights Act]; now it is proposed to incorporate that same provision in the fundamental instrument of the nation. I am in favor of doing so. I voted for the proposition to declare that the children of all parentage, whatever, born in California, should be regarded and treated as citizens of the United States, entitled to equal Civil Rights with other citizens."
- Andrew Johnson. Veto of the Civil Rights Bill. teachingamericanhistory.org. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-29）.
- Rodriguez, C.M. "The Second Founding: The Citizenship Clause, Original Meaning, and the Egalitarian Unity of the Fourteenth Amendment" [PDF] (PDF). U. Pa. J. Const. L. 2009, 11: 1363–1475 [2011-07-15]. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2011-07-15）.
- U.S. Department of State. Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality. 2008-02-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-28）.
- For the text of the first Bancroft treaties see Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States 1776-1949 (compiled under the direction of Charles. I. Bevans), VIII (Germany-Iran), Washington, DC: The Department of State, Government Printing Office, 1971 [2013-09-05], （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）
- Yoo, John. Survey of the Law of Expatriation: Memorandum Opinion for the Solicitor General. justice.gov. 2002-06-12 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-09-26）.
- Berger, Raoul. Government by Judiciary : The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment 2nd. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1997: 58 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 0865971447. （原始内容存档于2012-10-22）.
- Beatty, Jack. Age of Betrayal: The Triumph of Money in America, 1865-1900. New York: Vintage Books. 2008-04-08: 135 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 1400032423. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Bogen, David. Privileges and Immunities: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution. Praeger. 2003-04-30: 104 [2013-09-05]. ASIN B001ECQKR0. （原始内容存档于2021-04-12）.
- Barnett, Randy. Privileges or Immunities Clause alive again. SCOTUSblog. 2010-06-28 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-13）.
- Curry, James A.; Riley, Richard B.; Battiston, Richard M. 6. Constitutional Government: The American Experience. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. 2003: 210 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 0-7872-9870-0. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Cord, Robert L. The Incorporation Doctrine and Procedural Due Process Under the Fourteenth Amendment: An Overview (PDF). Brigham Young University Law Review. 1987, (3): 868 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2010-06-22）.
- Due Process of Law – Substantive Due Process. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Thomson Gale. 1998 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-06）.
- Griswold v. Connecticut. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-09-05）.
- Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973) Doe v. Bolton 410 U.S. 179 (1973). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-06-10）.
- Spindelman, Marc. Surviving Lawrence v. Texas. Michigan Law Review. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2004-06-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-06-10）.
- 19-1392 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (06/24/2022) (PDF). 美国最高法院. [2022-06-26]. （原始内容 (PDF)存档于2022-06-24）.
- Jess Bravin and Kris Maher. Justices Set New Standard for Recusals. The Wall Street Journal. 2009-06-08 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-11-11）.
- Levy, Leonard W. Barron v. City of Baltimore 7 Peters 243 (1833). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-03-29）.
- Foster, James C. Bingham, John Armor. Finkleman, Paul (编). Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties. CRC Press: 145. 2006 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Amar, Akhil Reed. The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. Yale Law Journal (The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 101, No. 6). 1992, 101 (6): 1193–1284 [2013-09-05]. JSTOR 796923. doi:10.2307/796923. （原始内容存档于2013-09-03）.
- Duncan v. Louisiana (Mr. Justice Black, joined by Mr. Justice Douglas, concurring). Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute. 1968-05-20 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-03-23）.
- Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis (1916). Supreme.justia.com. 1916-05-22 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-21）.
- The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis, and Interpretation - 1992 Edition --> Amendments to the Constitution --> Seventh Amendment - Civil Trials. U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. Government Printing Office: 1464. 1992 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-14）.
- Failinger, Marie. Equal protection of the laws. Schultz, David Andrew (编). The Encyclopedia of American Law. Infobase: 152–153. 2009 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2017-01-07）.
- Primus, Richard. Bolling Alone. Columbia Law Review. 2004-05 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-10-13）.
- Johnson, John W. Historic U.S. Court Cases: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. 2001-01-01: 446–447 [2013-09-05]. ISBN 978-0-415-93755-9. （原始内容存档于2020-08-01）.
- Abrams, Eve. Plessy/Ferguson plaque dedicated. WWNO (University New Orleans Public Radio). 2009-02-12 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-15）.
- Forced Busing and White Flight. Time. 1978-09-25 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-08-23）.
- Greenhouse, Linda. Justices Limit the Use of Race in School Plans for Integration. The New York Times. 2007-06-29 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-17）.
- Supreme Court Drama: Cases That Changed America. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 1978. Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2001 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Alger, Jonathan. Grutter/Gratz and Beyone: the Diversity Leadership Challenge. University of Michigan. 2003-10-11 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2011-08-13）.
- Eckes, Susan B. Race-Conscious Admissions Programs: Where Do Universities Go From Gratz and Grutter?. Journal of Law and Education. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2004-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Howe, Amy. Finally! The Fisher decision in Plain English. SCOTUSblog. 2013-06-24 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-29）.
- Reed v. Reed 1971. Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2001-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Karst, Kenneth L. Craig v. Boren 429 U.S. 190 (1976). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Bush v. Gore. Encyclopaedia Britannica. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-07-08）.
- Daniels, Gilda R. Fred Gray: life, legacy, lessons. Faulkner Law Review. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2012-03-22 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2016-02-06）.
- Friedman, Walter. Fourteenth Amendment. Encyclopedia of African-American Culture and History. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2006-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2014-07-14）.
- Sections 3 and 4: Disqualification and Public Debt. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. 1933-06-05 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- Pieces of History: General Robert E. Lee's Parole and Citizenship. Prologue Magazine (The National Archives). 2005, 37 (1) [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-07-30）.
- Goodman, Bonnie K. History Buzz: October 16, 2006: This Week in History. History News Network. 2006 [2009-09-08]. （原始内容存档于2009-09-08）.
17/10/1978 - Pres Carter signs bill restoring Jefferson Davis citizenship
- Chapter 157: The Oath As Related To Qualifications, Cannon's Precedents of the U.S. House of Representatives 6, 1936-01-01, 6 [2013-09-05], （原始内容存档于2013-06-20）
- Donald Trump banned from Colorado ballot in historic ruling by state's Supreme Court. AP News. 2023-12-19 [2023-12-20]. （原始内容存档于2023-12-20） （英语）.
- SECTIONS 3 AND 4. DISQUALIFICATION AND PUBLIC DEBT. Findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- 294 U.S. 330 at 354. Findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-23）.
- Liptak, Adam. The 14th Amendment, the Debt Ceiling and a Way Out. The New York Times. 2011-07-24 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-04-04）.
In recent weeks, law professors have been trying to puzzle out the meaning and relevance of the provision. Some have joined Mr. Clinton in saying it allows Mr. Obama to ignore the debt ceiling. Others say it applies only to Congress and only to outright default on existing debts. Still others say the president may do what he wants in an emergency, with or without the authority of the 14th Amendment.
- Our National Debt 'Shall Not Be Questioned,' the Constitution Says. The Atlantic. 2011-05-04 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-21）.
- Sahadi, Jeanne. Is the debt ceiling unconstitutional?. CNN Money. 2011-07-07 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-15）.
- Rosen, Jeffrey. How Would the Supreme Court Rule on Obama Raising the Debt Ceiling Himself?. The New Republic. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-25）.
- Chemerinsky, Erwin. The Constitution, Obama and raising the debt ceiling. Los Angeles Times. 2013-09-05 [July 30, 2011]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-21）.
- Engel, Steven A. The McCulloch theory of the Fourteenth Amendment: City of Boerne v. Flores and the original understanding of section 5. Yale Law Journal. – 通过HighBeam Research . 1999-10-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-05-09）.
- Kovalchick, Anthony. Judicial Usurpation of Legislative Power: Why Congress Must Reassert its Power to Determine What is Appropriate Legislation to Enforce the Fourteenth Amendment. Chapman Law Review. 2007-02-15, 10 (1) [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-05-03）.
- FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment, p. 40. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- Eisenberg, Theodore. Katzenbach v. Morgan 384 U.S. 641 (1966). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. – 通过HighBeam Research . 2000-01-01 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2015-09-24）.
- FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment, p. 40. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com. [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-25）.
- ''City of Boerne v. Flores'', Opinion of the Court, Part III-A-3. Supct.law.cornell.edu. 1997-06-25 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-07-28）.
webcitation.org
- Amendment XIV. US Government Printing Office. [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-23）.
- 14th Amendment: why birthright citizenship change 'can't be done'. Christian Science Monitor. 2010-08-10 [2013-09-04]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-13）.
- CRS Annotated Constitution. Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. [2013-06-12]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-12）.
[w]ithout doubt...denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
- Holmes, Oliver Wendell, Jr. 274 U.S. 200: Buck v. Bell. Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. [2013-06-12]. （原始内容存档于2013-06-12）.
wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
- Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883)
- Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884)
- United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
- For example, see Perez v. Brownell, 356 U.S. 44 (1958), overruled by Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
- Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)
- 444 U.S. 252 (1980)
- Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873)
- e.g., United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000)
- Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999), quote:Despite fundamentally differing views concerning the coverage of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, most notably expressed in the majority and dissenting opinions in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873), it has always been common ground that this Clause protects the third component of the right to travel. Writing for the majority in the Slaughter-House Cases, Justice Miller explained that one of the privileges conferred by this Clause "is that a citizen of the United States can, of his own volition, become a citizen of any State of the Union by a bona fide residence therein, with the same rights as other citizens of that State." (emphasis added)
- McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010)
- Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578 (1897)
- Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
- Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 525 (1923)
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)
- Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887)
- Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366 (1898)
- Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908)
- Wilson v. New, 243 U.S. 332 (1917)
- United States v. Doremus, 249 U.S. 86 (1919)
- West Coast Hotel v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937)
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
- Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
- Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
- 505 U.S. 845 (1992), 505 U.S. 846 (1992)
- Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
- See also Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. ___ (2009)
- Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243 (1833)
- 118 U.S. 394 (1886)
- Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880)
- Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)
- Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
- Berea College v. Kentucky, 211 U.S. 45 (1908)
- Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
- Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954)
- United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)
- Levy v. Louisiana, 361 U.S. 68 (1968)
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
- Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003)
- Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)
- Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971)
- Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976)
- Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964)
- Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964)
- Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993)
- Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)
- League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006)
- Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974)
- Perry v. United States294 U.S. 330 (1935)
- Katzenbach v. Morgan, 384 U.S. 641 (1966)
- City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997)
wsj.com
online.wsj.com
- Jess Bravin and Kris Maher. Justices Set New Standard for Recusals. The Wall Street Journal. 2009-06-08 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2012-11-11）.
wwno.org
- Abrams, Eve. Plessy/Ferguson plaque dedicated. WWNO (University New Orleans Public Radio). 2009-02-12 [2013-09-05]. （原始内容存档于2013-01-15）.