Article I, Section 8, Clause 4
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
The Federalist and Federalist essays
- cited bySuggestedCitizen of New Haven 2, ¶ 6
The new powers vested in the United States, are, to regulate commerce; provide for a uniform practice respecting naturalization, bankruptcies, and organizing, arming and training the militia ; and for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States ; and for promoting the progress of science in the…
The paragraph names the power over uniform rules of naturalization and bankruptcies.
- quoted bySuggestedA Native of Virginia, Article I, ¶ 62
To eſtabliſh an uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform •aws on the ſubject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
The paragraph prints Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution as signed; the quoted words are the same as the clause's (apart from capitals and the long s), though the pamphlet's punctuation differs in places.
- quoted byReviewedFederalist No. 32, ¶ 2
The third will be found in that clause which declares that Congress shall have power “to establish an UNIFORM RULE of naturalization throughout the United States.” This must necessarily be exclusive; because if each State had power to prescribe a DISTINCT RULE, there could not be a UNIFORM RULE.
Quotes the naturalization words of this clause, introduced as "that clause which declares that Congress shall have power"; the quotation ends with "throughout the United States" and omits the clause's words on bankruptcies.
- quoted bySuggestedFederalist No. 42, ¶ 12
…value thereof, and of foreign coin; to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the current coin and secureties of the United States; to fix the standard of weights and measures; to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws of bankruptcy, to prescribe the manner in which the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of each State shall be proved, and the effect they shall have in other States; and…
Reproduces the wording of this clause in its list of the third class of powers, with "laws of bankruptcy" for the clause's "Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies."
- cited bySuggestedFederalist No. 42, ¶ 19
The new Constitution has accordingly, with great propriety, made provision against them, and all others proceeding from the defect of the Confederation on this head, by authorizing the general government to establish a uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States.
Names the authority "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States" and "the power of establishing uniform laws of bankruptcy," echoing this clause's words.
Anti-Federalist essays
- cited bySuggestedFederal Farmer 3, ¶ 18
If uniform bankrupt laws can be made without producing real and substantial inconveniences, I wish them to be made by congress.
Discusses "general bankrupt laws, made by the union" and "uniform bankrupt laws" made by congress, echoing this clause's "uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies."
- cited bySuggestedSydney 2, ¶ 51
The 1st art, 8 sec, 4th clause, give to the new government power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.
The paragraph cites "1st art, 8 sec, 4th clause" and echoes its words "uniform rule of naturalization".
Debates in Congress
- cited bySuggestedSenate, April 6, 1864, ¶ 90
I know it may be said that they may have had, to some extent, the people of Europe in their mind because they provided for naturalization.
The paragraph says the framers "provided for naturalization" and speaks of "the power of naturalization"; only the naturalization clause of Article I, Section 8 fits.
- cited bySuggestedSenate, April 7, 1864, ¶ 109
The power of naturalization is in our hands.
The paragraph says "the power of naturalization is in our hands", speaking of Congress; only the naturalization clause of Article I, Section 8 fits.
- cited bySuggestedSenate, June 8, 1866, ¶ 91
…the several States at thotimcof thoadoption ot' the Federal Constitution became citizens of the United States, and no State thereafter can deprive them or their posterity of this ri ht The power to naturalize is exclusive o in Congress, and the ioreixncrnaturiilizod becomes antigen ot the United States, and necessarily is a citizen of the State in which lie is domiciled.
The paragraph, quoting Judge Curtis's Dred Scott opinion, names Congress's power to naturalize. The OCR reads "exclusiv o".
- cited bySuggestedSenate, June 8, 1866, ¶ 111
The States, after the adoption, could no longer naturalize. This power, by the Constitution, was given to Congress. But now upon the moment of naturalization the foreigner becomes a citizen of the United States, and may become a citizen of any one of the States by the same…
The paragraph names the power to naturalize given to Congress by the Constitution.
- cited bySuggestedSenate, February 17, 1869, ¶ 145
Certainly it would not; but there is nothing in the amendment which requires us to regulate and prescribe this manner by one uniform rule, such as the Constitution requires, as it respects bankruptcy and naturalization.
The paragraph names the "uniform rule ... the Constitution requires, as it respects bankruptcy and naturalization"; only Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 fits.
- cited bySuggestedSenate, February 8, 1869 (2), ¶ 721
The Constitution gives to the United States the right to establish a uniform system of naturalization; so that Europeans and Asiatics coming to our coast may bo naturalized upon the same conditions in California and in New York.
The paragraph says "the Constitution gives to the United States the right to establish a uniform system of naturalization"; only Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 fits.
The Supreme Court
Cases whose essays in the Constitution Annotated cite them under this clause, oldest first. Each link names the pages it comes from.
- interpreted bySuggestedSturges v. Crowninshield (1819)17 U.S. 122, decided February 15, 1819
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.2.2, ArtI.S8.C4.2.6, pp. 418, 425.
- interpreted bySuggestedHanover National Bank v. Moyses (1902)186 U.S. 181, decided June 2, 1902
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 4 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.2.2, ArtI.S8.C4.2.3, ArtI.S8.C4.2.5, ArtI.S8.C4.2.6, pp. 420, 423, 424, 425.
- interpreted bySuggestedOverruledPerez v. Brownell (1958)356 U.S. 44, decided March 31, 1958
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 5 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.1.6, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.1, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.2, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.3, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.4, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.5, pp. 409, 410, 412, 413, 415.
- interpreted bySuggestedTrop v. Dulles (1958)356 U.S. 86, decided March 31, 1958
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.5, pp. 413, 414.
- interpreted bySuggestedAfroyim v. Rusk (1967)387 U.S. 253, decided May 29, 1967
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 7 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.1.1, ArtI.S8.C4.1.4.2, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.1, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.2, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.3, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.4, ArtI.S8.C4.1.6.5, pp. 389, 399, 409, 410, 412, 413, 415.
- interpreted bySuggestedRogers v. Bellei (1971)401 U.S. 815, decided April 5, 1971
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 3 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.1.1, ArtI.S8.C4.1.2, ArtI.S8.C4.1.2.1, ArtI.S8.C4.1.4.2, pp. 390, 399, 400.
- interpreted bySuggestedNorthern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. (1982)458 U.S. 50, decided June 28, 1982
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.2.5, pp. 423, 424.
- interpreted bySuggestedSessions v. Morales-Santana (2017)582 U.S. 47, decided June 12, 2017
The Constitution Annotated's essays on this provision cite the case on 2 pages.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays ArtI.S8.C4.1.4.3, ArtI.S8.C4.1.5, ArtI.S8.C4.1.5.1, pp. 401, 402.
On Article I, Section 8 as a whole
- cited bySuggestedHouse, January 6, 1865, ¶ 34
- cited bySuggestedHouse, August 27, 1962, ¶ 261
- cited bySuggestedSenate, June 12, 1911, ¶ 292
- cited bySuggestedSenate, February 16, 1933 (2), ¶ 291
- cited bySuggestedSenate, March 27, 1962 (3), ¶ 153
- cited bySuggestedMassachusetts convention, January 21, 1788, ¶ 31
- cited bySuggestedPennsylvania convention, December 4, 1787, ¶ 51
- cited bySuggestedRemarks on the New Plan, ¶ 6
- cited byFederalist No. 82, note 2
Links marked “Suggested” were proposed by a machine and await review by a person. How links are made · Map of connections