One of those amendments abolished slavery.

其中一項修正案廢除了奴隸制。

One granted the right to vote to African-American men.

一是賦予非洲裔美國男子選舉權。

And one, among other things, gave African-Americans the right of citizenship.

其中之一就是賦予非洲裔美國人公民權。

But this one, the 14th Amendment, dealing with citizenship, it was interesting.

但這一條，即涉及公民身份的第 14 條修正案，很有意思。

It never actually used the words African, or black, or race, or former slaves.

實際上，它從未使用過非洲人、黑人、種族或前奴隸等字眼。

Instead, it contained a rule that, with some exceptions, being born in the U.S. would make you a citizen of the U.S., birthright citizenship.

相反，它包含了一條規則，即除某些例外情況外，在美國出生將使你成為美國公民，即與生俱來的公民權。

If you're born here, you're a citizen here.

如果你出生在這裡，你就是這裡的公民。

Birthright.

與生俱來的權利

Birthright.

與生俱來的權利

Birthright citizenship.

出生公民權。

In 2025, on Donald Trump's first day as, again, president, he signed an executive order to end birthright citizenship for the children of anyone temporarily or unlawfully in the

2025 年，唐納德-特朗普（Donald Trump）再次擔任總統的第一天，就簽署了一項行政命令，終止任何暫時或非法居留在美國的人的子女的出生公民權。

U.S.

美國

Over the next few weeks, that order was blocked by more than one federal judge, with one of the cases calling birthright citizenship a foundation of our democracy.

在接下來的幾周裡，不止一位聯邦法官阻止了這一命令，其中一位法官稱與生俱來的公民權是我們民主的基礎。

And as of this video, we don't actually know how this will all shake out, if the Trump administration will back down, if the Supreme Court will back them up.

截至目前，我們還不知道這一切會如何發展，特朗普政府是否會退讓，最高法院是否會支持他們。

Trump had had his eye on birthright citizenship for some time.

特朗普早就盯上了出生公民權。

Number one, the 14th Amendment is very questionable as to whether or not somebody can come over, have a baby, and immediately that baby is a citizen.

首先，第 14 條修正案對於是否有人可以過來生個孩子，然後孩子馬上就能成為公民這一點是很有疑問的。

And he hasn't been the only one to feel that way.

他不是唯一有這種感覺的人。

Today, 40% of Americans think that the children of undocumented immigrants should not be given birthright citizenship.

如今，40% 的美國人認為，無證移民的子女不應獲得與生俱來的公民權。

The meaning of the 14th Amendment didn't just come up for debate this year.

第 14 條修正案的含義並不是今年才開始討論的。

It's actually an argument we've been having with ourselves as a country going way back.

實際上，這是我們這個國家自古以來就有的爭論。

And a lot of that debate has been around this idea of who is supposed to get citizenship and who isn't.

很多爭論都是圍繞著 "誰應該獲得公民身份，誰不應該 "這一觀點展開的。

Like, for example…

比如...

The 14th Amendment meant to give citizenship to freed slaves.

第 14 條修正案旨在賦予獲得自由的奴隸公民權。

It was never meant to give citizenship to foreign aliens.

它從來就不是為了給外籍人士公民身份。

So OK.

那好吧。

Is that true?

這是真的嗎？

What does the law actually say about birthright citizenship?

關於出生公民權，法律究竟是怎麼規定的？

And why have Americans been arguing over it for almost 200 years?

為什麼美國人為此爭論了近 200 年？

So, in this video, we're going to look at the three moments that made us a country where everyone born here is a citizen.

是以，在這段視頻中，我們將回顧使我們成為一個在這裡出生的每個人都是公民的國家的三個時刻。

And we're going to start with… actually, with none of these.

我們將從......實際上，沒有這些開始。

First, we're going to start quickly here at the original U.S. Constitution, which said nothing about who is and is not a citizen.

首先，我們先從最初的《美國憲法》開始，其中並未提及誰是公民，誰不是公民。

The idea that you're a citizen if you're born here, that existed, but it was more of a legal assumption at the time, inherited from English common law.

出生在這裡就是公民的觀念是存在的，但這在當時更像是一種法律假設，是從英國普通法繼承下來的。

It was just simply understood, if you were born in the realm, you were subject of the king.

人們只是簡單地理解為，如果你出生在王國，你就是國王的臣民。

Which itself came from this old Roman idea of use soli, or the right of soil, as opposed to the right of blood, where citizenship is passed down from your parents.

這本身就源於古羅馬的 "使用權"（use soli）思想，即土地權，而不是血緣權，在血緣權中，公民權由父母傳承。

But because use soli is more of a principle than a law, for the first 70-ish years of the U.S., there aren't really specific rules on who is and isn't born an American citizen.

但是，由於 "出生地原則 "更像是一項原則而非法律，是以在美國建國的前 70 多年裡，並沒有關於誰是或不是美國公民的具體規定。

Until… 1857.

直到......1857 年。

Just a few years before the Civil War, a time when the U.S. looks like this.

就在南北戰爭的幾年前，美國的面貌是這樣的。

Some states where slavery is legal, some where it isn't.

有些州奴隸制合法，有些州不合法。

And around this time, an enslaved man is taken by his enslaver from a slave state into free territory.

大約在這個時候，一個被奴役的人被他的奴隸主從一個奴隸州帶到了自由領土。

And he eventually files a lawsuit, saying that entering free territory should have made him a free man.

他最終提起訴訟，稱進入自由領土本應使他成為自由人。

His case eventually goes to the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., and it will come to be known as the Dred Scott decision.

他的案件最終提交給位於華盛頓特區的美國最高法院，這就是著名的 "德雷德-斯科特案"。

That's his name.

這是他的名字。

And what the court says is neither Scott nor his family are free.

而法庭的說法是，斯科特和他的家人都沒有自由。

And they add that he's also not a citizen.

他們還補充說，他也不是公民。

And in fact, they say that as a rule, a person of the African race cannot be a U.S. citizen by birth or otherwise.

事實上，他們說，作為一項規則，非洲人種無論是否出生，都不能成為美國公民。

The Supreme Court ultimately concludes that they weren't considered to be part of the people of the United States, part of the citizenry of the United States.

最高法院最終得出結論，他們不被視為美國人民的一部分，美國公民的一部分。

At this time, there are many free black people in the free states of the U.S., but this court decision officially says that the country now has two classes of people, those who are citizens or who can become citizens or whose children can be citizens, and those for whom none of that applies.

目前，在美國的自由州有許多自由黑人，但法院的這一判決正式表明，美國現在有兩類人，一類是公民或可以成為公民或其子女可以成為公民的人，另一類是這些都不適用的人。

And within a few years, ideas like that have literally torn the U.S. apart.

而在短短几年內，這樣的想法簡直讓美國四分五裂。

These states secede.

這些州分離出去。

And these states go to war against them, partly to eliminate slavery and that two-tiered system.

這些州與他們開戰，部分原因是為了消除奴隸制和雙軌制。

And they win.

他們贏了。

So now the Civil War is over, and the victorious North decides to undo the Dred Scott case by passing the first American law to say that people born here are citizens, the Civil Rights

現在南北戰爭結束了，勝利的北方決定通過第一部美國法律，即《民權法案》，廢除 "德雷德-斯科特案"，規定在這裡出生的人都是公民。

Act of 1866.

1866 年法案

The president at the time has some objections to this, and in a letter to Congress, he complains that in addition to African Americans, birthright citizenship is also going to make gypsies and Chinese people citizens.

當時的總統對此有些異議，他在給國會的一封信中抱怨說，除了非裔美國人，出生公民權還將使吉普賽人和華人成為公民。

But Congress actually has enough votes to pass it over the president's objections, and it becomes law.

但實際上，國會有足夠的票數，可以不顧總統的反對通過該法案，使其成為法律。

Problem number two.

問題二

There would always be the risk that the civil rights laws could be modified by a subsequent

民權法總是有可能被後來的立法者修改。

Congress.

國會。

A future Congress could theoretically repeal the law.

理論上，未來的國會可以廢除這項法律。

So to make birthright citizenship a more permanent part of the law, they also decide to write it into a constitutional amendment, what will become the 14th Amendment.

是以，為了使與生俱來的公民權成為法律中更永久的一部分，他們還決定將其寫入憲法修正案，即後來的第 14 條修正案。

And it says, all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.

該法規定，所有在美國出生或歸化並受其管轄的人都是美國公民。

This is the language that will put birthright citizenship into the U.S. Constitution.

這就是將出生公民權寫入美國憲法的語言。

But it will also eventually be the source of some debate.

但它最終也會引起一些爭論。

Because of this line, the qualifier, subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.

因為有了這條線，限定詞 "受美國司法管轄 "就成了 "受......司法管轄"。

For example, let's say an immigrant comes to the U.S. and then has a child.

例如，假設一位移民來到美國，然後有了一個孩子。

Are they subject to the U.S.'s jurisdiction?

他們是否受美國管轄？

The amendment itself doesn't elaborate on this.

修正案本身並沒有對此進行詳細說明。

But before Congress passes the 14th Amendment, as they debate it, they actually keep pretty good records of their conversations.

但在國會通過第 14 條修正案之前，他們在進行辯論時，實際上保存了很好的談話記錄。

For example, one senator asks the rest of the Senate, won't this give citizenship to the children of Chinese people?

例如，一位參議員問參議院的其他議員，這不會給中國人的子女公民身份嗎？

Another senator says, yes, the child of an Asian is as much a citizen as the child of a European.

另一位參議員說，是的，亞洲人的孩子和歐洲人的孩子一樣都是公民。

The debates over the 14th Amendment matter because they showed that they understood that children of immigrants would become citizens at birth under this rule.

關於第 14 條修正案的辯論之所以重要，是因為這些辯論表明，他們明白，根據這一規則，移民子女一出生就會成為公民。

So it's with that understanding that birthright citizenship enters the Constitution.

是以，正是基於這種理解，與生俱來的公民權才被寫入了憲法。

A big majority of Congress votes for it, but not everyone.

國會中的絕大多數人都投了贊成票，但並非所有人都投了贊成票。

For example, this guy, the one that was concerned about Chinese people becoming citizens, he does not vote for it.

比如這個人，就是那個擔心中國人成為公民的人，他不投贊成票。

And that is actually important.

這一點其實很重要。

The 14th Amendment becoming law doesn't necessarily mean that everyone likes it.

第 14 修正案成為法律並不一定意味著每個人都喜歡它。

Remember that.

記住這一點。

It's going to come back later.

它稍後會回來的。

And after a quick break, we're going to talk about where that debate goes next and how it creates the 14th Amendment's first big test.

稍事休息後，我們將討論這場辯論的下一步走向，以及它如何為第 14 修正案帶來第一次重大考驗。

I made this video because I wanted to better understand how we became a country that on one hand offers birthright citizenship, but on the other is a place where a lot of people are mad about that.

我之所以製作這段視頻，是因為我想更好地瞭解我們是如何成為一個一方面提供與生俱來的公民權，另一方面卻有很多人為此而瘋狂的國家的。

Like we say in the video, it's about 40% of all Americans.

就像我們在視頻中說的，大約佔美國總人口的 40%。

As you can see for yourself, it's also about 90% of YouTube commenters.

正如你自己所看到的，YouTube 上大約 90% 的評論者也是如此。

Vox's mission is not necessarily to tell you the news.

Vox 的使命不一定是告訴你新聞。

There's lots of people doing that.

很多人都在這麼做。

It's overwhelming as is.

現在的情況讓人不知所措。

What we try to do is give you the context and hopefully the insight to understand what is important and what is distraction.

我們要做的是給你提供背景，希望你能瞭解什麼是重要的，什麼是分散注意力的。

If that mission sounds like something you might want to lend your support to, you can do that at vox.com slash memberships.

如果這一使命聽起來像你想支持的事情，你可以在 vox.com slash 會員資格網站上這樣做。

That's it.

就是這樣。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Okay.

好的

So, so far in the story, we've seen both a president and a senator voice kind of the same concern about specifically Chinese people becoming American citizens.

是以，到目前為止，我們看到總統和參議員都對中國人成為美國公民表達了同樣的擔憂。

And this is actually pretty emblematic of this time period when there are a growing number of Chinese laborers in the U.S. along with a growing sentiment from some that they don't belong here.

這實際上是這一時期中國勞工在美國人數不斷增加的一個縮影，同時一些人認為他們不屬於這裡。

And in 1882, Congress passes the Chinese Exclusion Act.

1882 年，國會通過了《排華法案》。

And it says, among other things, Chinese immigrants can't become citizens.

其中規定，中國移民不能成為公民。

Though it doesn't say anything about their children.

雖然沒有提到他們的孩子。

This is only meant to last 10 years, but it ends up being the first of several Chinese

這本是一個為期 10 年的計劃，但最終卻成為了多箇中國項目中的第一個。

Exclusion Acts that remain in effect until 1943.

直到 1943 年仍然有效的《排外法案》。

And it's in that context that a few years after the Chinese Exclusion Act, a guy from

正是在這種背景下，《排華法案》頒佈幾年後，一位來自

San Francisco goes to visit his family in China.

舊金山去中國探親。

A few months later, he comes back and is denied entry to the U.S.

幾個月後，他再次來到美國，卻被拒絕入境。

He says, but I was born here.

他說，但我出生在這裡。

I'm a citizen.

我是公民

And his case eventually goes to the Supreme Court.

他的案件最終被提交到最高法院。

The guy's name is Wong Kim Ark.

那個人叫王金櫃。

He's around 25, works as a cook, has a wife and child back in China.

他 25 歲左右，做廚師，在中國有妻子和孩子。

And his case is kind of the perfect test for the 14th Amendment, which remember says you're a citizen if you're born here and if you're subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.

他的案件是對第 14 條修正案的完美檢驗，該修正案規定，如果你出生在這裡，並且受美國司法管轄，你就是公民。

So here's the question.

那麼問題來了

When Wong was born here to his Chinese immigrant parents who were not U.S. citizens, was he under the jurisdiction of and thus a citizen of the place he was born?

王在這裡出生時，他的中國移民父母不是美國公民，那麼他是否在出生地的管轄之下，因而是出生地的公民？

Or was he a citizen of the place his parents were from?

或者，他是他父母家鄉的公民？

In 1898, the court makes their decision.

1898 年，法院做出裁決。

Wong Kim Ark is a citizen.

王金櫃是公民。

The court says there's three types of people in the U.S. who are not subject to the country's jurisdiction — diplomats, certain Native Americans, and invading forces occupying territory.

法院稱，在美國有三種人不受國家管轄--外交官、某些美國原住民和佔領領土的入侵部隊。

Their children are not citizens at birth.

他們的孩子一出生就不是公民。

But other than that, partly because of what is written down in those congressional debate

但除此之外，部分原因是國會辯論中寫下的內容

The court rules that subject to the jurisdiction was intended to mean pretty much everyone here, including immigrants and their children.

法院裁定，"受管轄 "的本意是指這裡的幾乎所有人，包括移民及其子女。

Everyone in the U.S. is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.

在美國的每個人都受美國司法管轄。

And thus, everyone born here is a citizen.

是以，在這裡出生的每個人都是公民。

And that basically remains the legal consensus to this day.

時至今日，這基本上仍然是法律上的共識。

For more than a century, officials have acted in concert.

一個多世紀以來，官員們採取了一致行動。

It is the repeated recognition by everyone within the legal system that this is the correct meaning of the 14th Amendment.

這是法律體系中每個人都反覆承認的第 14 條修正案的正確含義。

But a legal consensus is not necessarily the same as a popular consensus.

但法律共識並不一定等同於民眾共識。

In the 1980s and 1990s, the population of undocumented immigrants starts to go up.

20 世紀 80 年代和 90 年代，無證移民人口開始增加。

And birthright citizenship comes back as a political issue.

出生公民權又成為一個政治問題。

A growing chorus of Republican lawmakers are demanding another look at the 14th Amendment.

越來越多的共和黨議員要求重新審視第 14 修正案。

Subject to the jurisdiction, illegals don't fall under that, just like diplomats' children.

根據管轄範圍，非法移民不屬於管轄範圍，就像外交官的子女一樣。

If the 14th Amendment had not existed, my great-grandparents would not have been citizens.

如果沒有第 14 修正案，我的曾祖父母就不會成為公民。

Disagreement over birthright citizenship is not new.

關於出生公民權的分歧並不新鮮。

In fact, I'm going to tell you one more story about the 14th Amendment.

事實上，我要再給你們講一個關於第 14 修正案的故事。

Way back when Congress originally voted for it, part of why an amendment giving citizenship to African Americans was able to pass with these kinds of margins is because, at the end of the Civil War, only these states were even represented in Congress.

早在國會最初投票時，賦予非裔美國人公民權的修正案之所以能夠以如此大的優勢獲得通過，部分原因在於南北戰爭結束時，國會中甚至只有這些州有代表。

But for the 14th Amendment to become official, to become part of the Constitution, it also had to be ratified, voted for by three-quarters of all the state governments.

但要使第 14 條修正案正式成為《憲法》的一部分，還必須得到所有州政府四分之三的準許和投票支持。

And that did not happen at first.

而這種情況一開始並沒有發生。

None of these states wanted to ratify it.

這些州都不願意準許。

And then Congress made them.

然後，國會制定了這些規定。

They said, these states will only be readmitted to Congress if they ratify this amendment.

他們說，這些州只有準許這項修正案，才能重新加入國會。

You have lost a war, and these are the terms of peace.

你們輸掉了一場戰爭，這就是和平的條件。

And one way to look at that is that this amendment is kind of different.

有一種觀點認為，這項修正案是與眾不同的。

It isn't just some law from a long time ago.

這不僅僅是很久以前的法律。

It's a treaty.

這是一項條約。

It represented the leaving behind of an old country and the formation of a new one.

它代表著一箇舊國家的離去和一個新國家的建立。

Today, just like back then, the president is someone who doesn't agree that birthright citizenship should apply to everyone, even though, to be clear, a majority of Americans think it should.

今天，就像當年一樣，總統是一個不同意出生公民權應該適用於所有人的人，儘管說白了，大多數美國人認為應該適用。

And once again, it seems like the final call will be up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which, for more than a hundred years, has recognized again and again that birthright citizenship is the law.

一百多年來，美國最高法院一再承認，與生俱來的公民權就是法律。

We'll see what happens this time.

這次我們拭目以待。