The Impact of Justice Horace Gray and United States V. Wong Kim Ark Case on Me

In this short essay, I shall articulate why former Justice Horace Gray holds a particular interest to me. I shall begin by giving a brief biographical sketch of his judicial career for contextual purposes. Next, I shall explain why his opinion on the landmark case United States v. Wong Kim Ark has meant a great deal in my personal life. I shall do so by explaining the context behind United States v. Wong Kim Ark and what was Justice Gray’s opinion on such matters. Now, I shall begin a quick brief sketch of former Justice Horace Gray’s judicial career.

Justice Gray began his judicial career at the Massachusetts Supreme court. First, in 1854, as a court reporter, then became the youngest Associate Justice on the Massachusetts supreme court in 1864. As older members retired, Justice Gray distinguished himself as an excellent legal writer and thinker and became the Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court in 1873. As Chief Justice, he only ever dissented once and never once had any of his decisions overruled which speaks to his judicial prudence. In 1881, Justice Gray was appointed to the U. S. Supreme Court by Republican President Chester A. Arthur. Justice Gray served on the Supreme Court for twenty-one years and distinguished himself in history for his knowledge and application of precedents set before him. During his time as an Associate Justice, he ruled on many landmarks and influential cases such as Pollock v. Farmers Loan and Trust Company, holding the nation's first income tax law unconstitutional, Juilliard v. Greenman, holding that the U. S government had the power to issue paper money against its own credit during times of peace as well as times of war, and many other cases.

However, a case that Justice Gray wrote the majority opinion on has had a great significance on my life, landmark case United States v. Wong Kim Ark. I shall now explain the significance of Justice Gray’s opinion on United States v. Wong Kim Ark had on me. Allow me to provide some brief context into the landmark case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark. In 1882, the U. S Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which prohibited the immigration of laborers and people who were nationally Chinese. This is a period of time where despite their efforts and contributions to the transcontinental railroad and other labor demanding jobs, Chinese immigrants were more often than not the target of xenophobic behavior. Well, in 1873, Wong Kim Ark was born to two people of Chinese descent, Wong Si Ping and his mother Wee Lee, who were legally domiciled and permanent residents of the United States living in San Francisco. It is important to note that due to the Naturalization Act of 1790, Wong Kim Ark’s parents were not eligible for U. S citizenship since the law stated that only “free white persons’ could become naturalized citizens of the U. S.

Moving on, Wong Kim Ark’s parents moved back to China but Wong Kim Ark decided to stay in California and visit his parents when he could. In fact, Wong Kim Ark visited his parents in China twice, once in 1890 and once in 1894. Wong Kim Ark’s first trip seemed relatively successful as he was able to visit them and come back to the U. S. However, his second trip, Wong Kim Ark was denied re-entry into the U. S on the basis of Chinese Exclusion Act. Wong Kim Ark fought this decision and brought his case all the way to the Supreme Court on the, at the time, the controversial issue of whether or not his birth in San Francisco was enough to grant him citizenship. The court ruled in a 6-2 majority, that interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment in such a way that enabled children that were born to foreigners on American soil be granted U. S citizenship. This set the strongest legal precedent for birthright citizenship, a concept that would be monumentally influential in today’s current demographic makeup of U. S citizens.

The main arguments against such a ruling used legal precedent in Slaughter-House Cases, Elk v. Wilkins, where Jus sanguinis (a principle in which citizenship is based on the statehood of one’s parents and not by the place of birth) superseded jus soli (a principle where the place of birth can determine citizenship) to justify limiting citizenship. However, Justice Horace fundamentally disagreed as with his excellence judicial prudence, supported his ruling by tracing back the development of English common law to counter the argument that Jus Sanguinis superseded jus soli. Furthermore, Justice Gray also appealed to the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and reviewed interpretations of the Citizenship Clause by lower federal and state in his ruling. Justice Gray’s use of his vast legal knowledge of legal precedent helped him in justifying his ruling on a landmark case that has yet to have been seriously challenged. Well, why is the Supreme Court ruling and Justice Horace’s opinion is such a great significance to me?

I am a first generation Chinese American, a son born to two Chinese immigrants in the famous city of San Francisco. When I read Justice Gray’s opinion on the ruling, with his various appeals to legal precedents and common law, it immediately made me grateful for the life I have. Justice Gray is an inspiration not only because of his excellent judicial prudence but also because Justice’s Gray’s was committed to the idea that public policy and politics should play no role in law. In a time where racial discrimination was common among the public and influential legislators were trying to limit citizenship to other races, Justice Gray held true to his beliefs and ruled solely based on his legal knowledge and judicial experience. Justice Gray’s philosophy and legal expertise inspire me to pursue a career as a public servant.

I want to give back to the community that has given me so much. The community that granted me citizenship despite me being born to Chinese immigrants. I want to be able to make decisions just as informed and unbiased as Justice Gray’s decisions throughout his judicial career. I would not be able to have most of the opportunities I have that come with being a citizen of this country. I would not able to attend a top public university without the scholarships awarded to U. S citizens or be able to experience internships with local government.

Most of what I am today is because I am an American. Because I was born in the U. S. I have never considered myself anything else but an American. This is why former Justice Horace Gray and his ruling that granted birthright citizenship are of a special significance to me.