2026-04-01T15:22:39-04:00 / 福克斯新闻
阿利托称1868年第十四修正案批准时，非法移民“基本不存在”
作者：阿什利·奥利弗 福克斯新闻
发布于2026年4月1日美国东部时间下午3:22
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6392371350112
阿利托在非法移民相关的出生公民权案件中援引斯卡利亚类比
周三，美国最高法院就出生公民权是否适用于非法移民子女的问题进行审议期间，大法官塞缪尔·阿利托援引了已故大法官安东宁·斯卡利亚的类比。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻文章了！
周三，美国最高法院就出生公民权是否适用于非法移民子女的问题进行审议期间，大法官塞缪尔·阿利托援引了已故大法官安东宁·斯卡利亚的类比。
阿利托表示，斯卡利亚曾举例说明如何将文本主义适用于现代情境，他在针对唐纳德·特朗普总统限制第十四修正案下出生公民权的高风险口头辩论中提出了这一观点。第十四修正案赋予绝大多数在美国出生的人自动公民身份。文本主义是一种法律观点，即法院应根据宪法文本和原始含义进行解读。
阿利托指出，非法移民就像微波炉这类现代技术一样，在1868年第十四修正案获得批准时基本不存在。阿利托承认该修正案存在历史例外情况，包括外国外交官子女和部分印第安人，并质疑非法移民的子女是否可被视为类似的现代例外。
“斯卡利亚大法官曾有一个针对这种情况的例子，”阿利托说，“他设想了一项早在任何人想到微波炉之前就通过的旧盗窃法案。之后有人因盗窃微波炉被起诉，此人辩称：‘好吧，我不能根据这项法案被定罪，因为微波炉在当时并不存在。’而他驳回了这一抗辩。这里存在一项通用规则，你需要将其适用于未来的应用场景。”
最高法院的禁令裁决如何推进特朗普的出生公民权之争
美国最高法院大法官塞缪尔·阿利托，2022年10月7日摄于华盛顿特区。（亚历克斯·王/盖蒂图片社）
阿利托表示，非法移民“在第十四修正案获得通过之时基本不存在”。
“那么当我们遇到一项通用规则时，该如何应对这种情况？”阿利托问道，质疑该规则是否旨在“适用于未来可能出现的应用场景”。
最高法院准备审查特朗普的出生公民权行政令
安东宁·斯卡利亚大法官（美联社照片/查尔斯·雷克斯·阿博格，资料图）
副检察长约翰·索尔向最高法院辩称，支持特朗普的出生公民权行政令，该命令将终止在美国出生的非法移民母亲或合法临时访客母亲所生婴儿的自动公民身份。
“我非常赞同你所阐述的观点，即存在一项通用原则，”索尔在谈及微波炉类比时对阿利托说道。
尽管索尔似乎与阿利托观点一致，但大多数大法官都对特朗普的论点表示强烈质疑。阿利托和克拉伦斯·托马斯大法官似乎是最有可能支持特朗普立场的人。
民众在唐纳德·特朗普总统预计于2026年4月1日抵达华盛顿特区前举行抗议。（阿尔·德拉戈/盖蒂图片社）
点击此处获取福克斯新闻应用程序
大法官埃琳娜·卡根表示，索尔无法按照阿利托的思路进行辩论，因为索尔的大部分论点都集中在临时访美人员而非非法移民身上。
“你的整个案件理论都建立在这个群体之上……所以你不能真正采用阿利托大法官的理论，”卡根说，“你必须辩称，在第十四修正案通过之时就已经存在这项原则。”
阿什利·奥利弗是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的记者，负责报道司法部和法律事务。可通过ashley.oliver@fox.com发送新闻线索。
Alito invokes Scalia analogy in birthright citizenship fight over illegal immigration
2026-04-01T15:22:39-04:00 / Fox News
Alito said illegal immigration ‘was basically unknown’ when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868
By Ashley Oliver Fox News
Published April 1, 2026 3:22pm EDT
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6392371350112
Alito invokes Scalia analogy in birthright citizenship case over illegal immigration
Justice Samuel Alito invoked an analogy from the late Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday as the Supreme Court weighed whether birthright citizenship extended to children of illegal immigrants.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
Justice Samuel Alito invoked an analogy from the late Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday as the Supreme Court weighed whether birthright citizenship extended to children of illegal immigrants.
Alito said that Scalia had illustrated how to apply textualism to modern circumstances, a point he raised during high-stakes oral arguments over President Donald Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which grants most people born in the United States automatic citizenship. Textualism is a legal view that courts should read the Constitution according to its text and original meaning.
Alito suggested that illegal immigration, like modern technologies such as microwaves, was basically unknown when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. Alito acknowledged historical exceptions to the amendment, including children born to foreign diplomats and certain Native Americans, and he questioned whether illegal immigrants’ children could be considered a comparable modern-day exception.
“Justice Scalia had an example that dealt with this situation,” Alito said. “He imagined an old theft statute that was enacted well before anybody conceived of a microwave oven. And then afterwards, someone is charged with the crime of stealing a microwave oven. And this fellow says, ‘Well, I can’t be convicted under this because the microwave oven didn’t exist at that time.’ And he dismissed that. There’s a general rule there, and you apply it to future applications.”
HOW THE SUPREME COURT’S INJUNCTION RULING ADVANCES TRUMP’S BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP FIGHT
United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito on October 7, 2022 in Washington, D.C.(Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Alito said that illegal immigration “was basically unknown at the time when the 14th amendment was adopted.”
“So how did we deal with that situation when we have a general rule?” Alito asked, questioning if the rule was intended to “apply to later applications that might come up.”
SUPREME COURT PREPARES TO REVIEW TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
Justice Antonin Scalia(AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast, File)
Solicitor General John Sauer argued to the Supreme Court in support of Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, which would end automatic citizenship for babies born in the United States to mothers who are illegal immigrants or legal temporary visitors.
“I strongly agree with the way that you framed it, that there is a general principle,” Sauer told Alito of the microwave analogy.
While Sauer appeared in sync with Alito, most of the justices voiced strong skepticism of Trump’s arguments.Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas appeared to be the most likely to back Trump’s position.
People demonstrate ahead of President Donald Trump’s expected arrival on April 01, 2026 in Washington, DC.(Al Drago/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Justice Elena Kagan said Sauer could not argue in the way Alito suggested because the bulk of Sauer’s arguments had centered on people temporarily visiting the country, not illegal immigrants.
“Your whole theory of the case is built on that group … so you can’t really be going with Justice Alito’s theory,” Kagan said. “You must be saying that there is a principle that was there at the time of the 14th Amendment.”
Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.
发表回复