Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420, 71 (1998)

Page:   Index   Previous  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71

490

MILLER v. ALBRIGHT

Breyer, J., dissenting

prescribed in this title and not otherwise." § 310(d), 66 Stat. 239, 8 U. S. C. § 1421(d).

As "naturalization" under this statute does not include the conferral of citizenship at birth, the provision does not apply here. See 8 U. S. C. § 1101(a)(23) ("The term 'naturalization' means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth" (emphasis added)).

Justice Scalia also says that the law, as excised, would favor fathers over mothers. Ante, at 459. The law, however, would require both fathers and mothers to prove their parentage; it would require that one or the other be an American, it would impose residency requirements that, if anything, would disfavor fathers. I cannot find the reverse favoritism that Justice Scalia fears.

For these reasons, I would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

Page:   Index   Previous  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71

Last modified: October 4, 2007