Who Is “We” in “We the People of the United States”?

In the past two years, an extreme idea has taken root in our politics: “We the People” means “We the White People.” The point of this warped view is not to deny blacks political rights (the 14th Amendment clearly resolved that point)—but it is to suggest that birthright citizenship is illegitimate. Translation:  “Anchor babies” born to “illegals” in the U.S. cannot lawfully acquire citizenship by force of the fact that they were born in America.

Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Curtis wrote a stinging dissenting opinion in the Dred Scott case—the 1857 case that ruled that a black man who was a slave in Missouri had no political rights under the Constitution and therefore had no legal status to sue in court for his freedom.

Justice Curtis offered this compelling historical rejoinder (red text indicates a quote). For context, he is explaining that the Constitution was formed after Americans had a failed experience with the Articles of Confederation, a loosely connected group of semi-sovereign states.

***
[QUOTING JUSTICE CURTIS]

“The fourth of the fundamental articles of the Confederation was as follows: ‘The free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice, excepted, shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States.’

… On the 25th of June, 1778, the Articles of Confederation being under consideration by the Congress, the delegates from South Carolina moved to amend this fourth article, by inserting after the word ‘free,’ and before the word ‘inhabitants,’ the word ‘white,’ so that the privileges and immunities of general citizenship would be secured only to white persons. 

Two States voted for the amendment, eight States against it, and the vote of one State was divided.

The language of the article stood unchanged, and both by its terms of inclusion, ‘free inhabitants,‘ and the strong implication from its terms of exclusion, ‘paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice,’ who alone were excepted, it is clear, that under the Confederation, and at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, free colored persons of African descent might be, and, by reason of their citizenship in certain States, were entitled to the privileges and immunities of general citizenship of the United States.”

His point? “We the People, in order to form a more perfect Union” had already included free blacks (including Dred Scott, who became free once he crossed into Illinois)—there was no racial disability as to citizenship, nor was there a “property” definition of whites who were citizens. Poor whites were on the same political footing as wealthy industrialists in the North and plantation owners in the South.

He points to Article II of our present Constitution which restricts eligibility to be U.S. president as follows:
[QUOTING JUSTICE CURTIS]

“The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, ‘a natural-born citizen.’ It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth.”

Thus, a child born to undocumented aliens in the U.S.-- even if not white-- may be president no less than Donald T. Trump. And if that child is eligible to be elected president, all people in his or her circumstances are United States citizens.

That is how we, the people, formed a more perfect union.