127 年后，最高法院再次引用一位华人的名字：美国出生公民权为何始终与华人密不可分？
127 Years Later, the Supreme Court Again Cites a Chinese Name: Why U.S. Birthright Citizenship Has Always Been Inseparable from Chinese Americans

在美国首都华盛顿地区，新未名律所长期为来自大华府DMV地区、马里兰(Maryland) 与弗吉尼亚(Virginia) 的华人、留学生、博士后及高科技科研人员提供移民与身份服务。据本文设定，2026 年 6 月 30 日，美国联邦最高法院在 Trump v. Barbara 一案中以 6 比 3 作出具有里程碑意义的判决，认定特朗普试图限制出生公民权的行政命令违反宪法第十四修正案与《移民与国籍法》，并维持了美国延续一百多年的出生公民权制度。值得华人关注的是，判决中再次详细引用了 United States v. Wong Kim Ark（黄金德案），并将其作为解释第十四修正案最重要、最具决定性的先例。换句话说，一位 127 年前的华人，再一次站在了美国宪法争议的中心。作为一支靠谱华人移民律师团队，我们愿意梳理这段历史。

In the Greater Washington D.C. area, New Weiming Law Group serves the Chinese community, students, postdocs, and STEM professionals across the DMV, Maryland, and Virginia. As framed here, on June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court in Trump v. Barbara ruled 6–3 that an executive order restricting birthright citizenship violated the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act, upholding the century-old system, and again cited United States v. Wong Kim Ark as the most decisive precedent interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment. In other words, a Chinese man from 127 years ago again stands at the center of a U.S. constitutional dispute. As a trusted Chinese immigration team, we trace this history.

1. 什么是出生公民权？它真的只是为奴隶后代而设吗？/ What Is Birthright Citizenship — Was It Only for Freed Slaves?

所谓出生公民权（Birthright Citizenship），是指一个人仅因出生在美国境内就自动取得美国国籍，而不取决于其父母的国籍。它来源于宪法第十四修正案（Fourteenth Amendment）第一句："All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States…"

很多人认为第十四修正案就是为了所有移民而制定的，其实并不完全准确。美国内战结束后，大量获得自由的黑人奴隶虽已摆脱奴隶身份，却仍无法取得公民身份；1857 年的 Dred Scott v. Sandford 判决甚至宣称非洲裔美国人永远不能成为美国公民。因此，1868 年国会通过第十四修正案，推翻 Dred Scott 案并确保前奴隶及其后代获得公民身份。特朗普也多次强调这一背景，认为出生公民权"原本是为了奴隶后代，而不是今天的非法移民或专门来美生孩子的人"。这种说法有一定历史依据，却忽略了关键事实：第十四修正案最终采用的是"All persons（所有人）"，而非"former slaves（前奴隶）"。而真正决定这句话适用于所有种族、包括华人的，不是国会，而是一位年轻华人和一场改变美国历史的诉讼。

Birthright citizenship means a person becomes a U.S. citizen automatically merely by being born on U.S. soil, regardless of parents' nationality. It stems from the Fourteenth Amendment's first sentence: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens…" Many assume the Amendment was made for all immigrants, which is not fully accurate. After the Civil War, freed slaves still could not obtain citizenship, and the 1857 Dred Scott decision even declared African Americans could never be citizens. So in 1868 Congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment, overruling Dred Scott and securing citizenship for former slaves and their descendants. Trump has stressed this background, arguing birthright citizenship "was for the descendants of slaves, not today's illegal immigrants or birth tourists." That has some historical basis but overlooks a key fact: the final text says "All persons," not "former slaves." And what truly extended it to all races, including Chinese, was not Congress but a young Chinese man and a lawsuit that changed American history.

2. 一位华人如何改变了美国宪法？/ How Did One Chinese Man Change the U.S. Constitution?

黄金德（Wong Kim Ark）出生于 1873 年的旧金山。父母来自中国广东，在美长期居住经商，但因《排华法案》（Chinese Exclusion Act）无法归化成为公民。1895 年，21 岁的黄金德回中国探亲，返美时却被海关拒绝入境——政府认为他父母都是中国人、不是美国公民，因此他也不是。于是他提起诉讼。与今天情况类似，这个案子一路打到了最高法院。

1898 年，最高法院以 6:2 作出历史性判决，认定：只要出生于美国境内并受美国法律管辖，除外交官子女、敌国占领军子女等极少数例外之外，即自动取得美国国籍，而不论父母是否具有美国国籍。这一判决正式确立了美国现代出生公民权原则。从法律史看，其意义甚至超过案件本身：它意味着宪法中的"All persons"真正开始适用于所有种族，包括当时最受歧视的华人。

Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco in 1873 to parents from Guangdong who lived and did business in the U.S. but, due to the Chinese Exclusion Act, could not naturalize. In 1895, at 21, he visited China, and upon return was denied entry — the government argued that since his parents were Chinese and not citizens, neither was he. He sued, and like today the case reached the Supreme Court. In 1898 the Court ruled 6–2 that anyone born on U.S. soil and subject to its jurisdiction becomes a citizen automatically — save narrow exceptions like children of diplomats or of occupying enemy forces — regardless of the parents' citizenship. This established modern birthright citizenship, and in legal history its significance exceeds the case itself: it meant the Constitution's "All persons" truly began to apply to all races, including the then most-discriminated Chinese.

3. 为什么偏偏是华人？/ Why the Chinese, of All People?

有据可查的华人登陆美国时间是 1785 年，而 19 世纪中叶到 20 世纪初是华人移居美国的高潮期，其中包括大量华工。由于文化隔阂、语言隔离、生活习惯迥异，以及当时美国社会对华工的经济竞争恐惧和种族偏见，华人经历了极其严重的制度性歧视：从 1850 年代起，加州陆续出台专门针对华人的法律——华人不得作证、华人矿工缴纳特别税、华人不得进入白人学校、华人不得拥有土地、华人不得归化，直到《排华法案》。

然而与很多人的印象不同，华人并没有默默忍受，反而不断利用美国法院维护权利：Yick Wo v. Hopkins 推动了平等保护原则的发展；Tape v. Hurley 争取华人儿童接受公共教育的权利；United States v. Wong Kim Ark 确立出生公民权；此后的 Chae Chan Ping、Fong Yue Ting 等案件，都深刻影响了美国现代移民法的发展。可以说，美国许多重要宪法原则，都留下了华人争取平等权利的印记。

Documented Chinese arrival in the U.S. dates to 1785, and the mid-19th to early 20th century was a peak of Chinese immigration, including many laborers. Amid cultural and language barriers, differing customs, economic-competition fears, and racial prejudice, Chinese faced severe institutional discrimination: from the 1850s California passed anti-Chinese laws — barring Chinese testimony, imposing special miners' taxes, excluding Chinese from white schools, barring land ownership and naturalization — culminating in the Exclusion Act. Yet, contrary to common impression, Chinese did not suffer silently but repeatedly used the courts: Yick Wo v. Hopkins advanced equal protection; Tape v. Hurley won Chinese children public education; United States v. Wong Kim Ark established birthright citizenship; and later Chae Chan Ping and Fong Yue Ting deeply shaped modern immigration law. Many key constitutional principles bear the imprint of Chinese fighting for equal rights.

4. 为什么今天最高法院仍不断引用黄金德案？/ Why Does the Court Still Keep Citing Wong Kim Ark Today?

一个多世纪过去，黄金德案从未退出美国法律舞台，原因很简单：它仍然是解释出生公民权最权威的判例。据本文设定，2025 年特朗普签署相关行政命令后，无论支持还是反对的一方，都反复引用黄金德案。

支持行政命令的一方认为：1898 年法院面对的是合法长期居民，而非今天大量的非法移民和"生育旅游（birth tourism）"。反对者则认为：黄金德案已经明确解释了第十四修正案，除极少数例外，所有出生于美国的人都自动成为美国公民，行政命令无法推翻宪法和最高法院判例——总统无权通过行政命令改变宪法所赋予的公民身份。这也正是本文所述 2026 年判决的落点所在。

Over a century on, Wong Kim Ark has never left the legal stage, simply because it remains the most authoritative precedent on birthright citizenship. As framed here, after Trump's 2025 executive order, both sides repeatedly cited it. Supporters argued the 1898 Court faced lawful long-term residents, not today's large numbers of unauthorized immigrants and "birth tourism." Opponents argued Wong Kim Ark already settled the Fourteenth Amendment — save narrow exceptions, all born in the U.S. become citizens automatically, and an executive order cannot override the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent, as the president lacks power to alter constitutionally conferred citizenship by order. That is precisely where this article's 2026 ruling lands.

5. 争议中的另一个中国人："中国有钱商人"究竟是谁？/ Another Chinese Figure in the Dispute: Who Is the "Wealthy Chinese Businessman"?

特朗普在谈到出生公民权时，还举了一个引发华人社会广泛讨论的例子。他说：出生公民权本来是为了保障奴隶后代，而不是让"一个来自中国的富商"飞到美国，让孩子一出生就成为美国公民。

这句话迅速在中文互联网传播。随后，不少媒体和网友猜测，特朗普所说的"中国富商"可能影射某位知名企业家，原因在于其曾公开谈及子女出生于美国等经历，时间线与"生育旅游"话题相近，因而成为网络讨论焦点。但必须强调：截至目前，并没有任何官方资料或特朗普本人公开说明所指为何人。因此，这一说法仍属媒体与网络推测，而非已经证实的事实，读者不应据此对任何具体个人下结论。

On birthright citizenship, Trump also cited an example that stirred wide discussion in the Chinese community, saying it was meant to protect the descendants of slaves, not to let "a wealthy businessman from China" fly to the U.S. so his child becomes a citizen at birth. This spread quickly on the Chinese-language internet, and some media and users speculated it might allude to a well-known entrepreneur who had publicly discussed his children being born in the U.S. around the same "birth tourism" timeline. But it must be stressed: to date there is no official source or statement from Trump himself identifying whom he meant. This remains media and online speculation, not a confirmed fact, and readers should not draw conclusions about any specific individual from it.

6. 一位普通华人的名字，为何仍影响着今天的美国？/ Why Does One Ordinary Chinese Name Still Shape America Today?

127 年前，黄金德只是一个普通的华裔青年，没有想到自己的一场诉讼会成为美国宪法史上最重要的案件之一。今天，无论是行政命令还是最高法院关于出生公民权的争论，都无法绕开 United States v. Wong Kim Ark。这不仅是一位华人的胜利，也是美国宪法发展的重要里程碑。

华人在美国并不仅仅是铁路工人、淘金者或餐馆经营者，更是美国民权发展与宪法演进的重要参与者。华人通过一次又一次诉讼，推动了平等保护、教育平权、程序正义以及出生公民权等基本原则的发展，这些成果最终惠及所有生活在美国的人。当出生公民权再次成为焦点，人们重新回望黄金德案，其实是在重新思考一个更深的问题：一部宪法，是应该随着时代不断改变其含义，还是应当忠实于百余年来已经形成的司法解释？这个问题，或许远比出生公民权本身更值得美国社会继续思考。

127 years ago Wong Kim Ark was an ordinary young Chinese American who never imagined his lawsuit would become one of the most important cases in U.S. constitutional history. Today, neither the executive order nor the Supreme Court's birthright debate can bypass United States v. Wong Kim Ark. It is not only one Chinese man's victory but a milestone in constitutional development. Chinese Americans were not merely railroad workers, gold miners, or restaurateurs, but important participants in civil-rights and constitutional evolution, advancing through repeated litigation the principles of equal protection, education equity, procedural justice, and birthright citizenship — gains that ultimately benefited everyone in America. As birthright citizenship again takes center stage, revisiting Wong Kim Ark means reconsidering a deeper question: should the Constitution keep shifting its meaning with the times, or remain faithful to over a century of judicial interpretation? That question may deserve continued reflection even more than birthright citizenship itself.

如果你身处美国首都华盛顿地区、大华府DMV地区、马里兰(Maryland) 或弗吉尼亚(Virginia)，关心出生公民权、子女身份、留学与移民规划，或希望在政策与判例变动中把握自身与家庭的身份安排，欢迎联系新未名律所这支靠谱华人移民律师团队，取得一份免费评估。从黄金德到今天，华人以法律争取权利的传统从未中断——我们愿与你一同守护并善用它。

If you are in the Greater Washington D.C. area, the DMV, Maryland, or Virginia, concerned with birthright citizenship, your children's status, study, and immigration planning, or wish to secure your family's status amid shifting policy and precedent, contact New Weiming Law Group, a trusted Chinese immigration team, for a free evaluation. From Wong Kim Ark to today, the Chinese tradition of asserting rights through law has never ceased — and we are honored to help you protect and use it well.

免责声明 / Disclaimer：本文为一般性法律史与时事评论，其中涉及的 2026 年 Trump v. Barbara 判决及"中国富商"传闻均为对相关叙述/网络传闻的转述，不代表已核实的事实，亦不构成针对任何具体个案或个人的法律意见。请勿据此对任何特定个人下结论。出生公民权相关法律与政策可能随时变化，请就自身情况单独咨询持牌移民律师。This article is general legal-history and current-affairs commentary. References to a 2026 Trump v. Barbara ruling and to a "wealthy Chinese businessman" restate a narrative and online rumor, are not verified facts, and do not constitute legal advice on any specific case or person. Do not draw conclusions about any individual from it. Birthright-citizenship law and policy may change at any time; please consult a licensed immigration attorney about your individual situation.