MacKenzie v. Hare

Background

The plaintiff was born and has always lived in California. In 1909 she lawfully married Gordon Mackenzie, a native and subject of Great Britain who still lived in California and did not naturalize. On January 22, 1913 she applied to register to vote in San Francisco. She was over twenty-one and had lived in the city more than ninety days. Election officials refused registration because they said she had taken her husband’s nationality under a 1907 federal law.

Reasoning

The Court examined the 1907 statute, which states generally that an American woman who marries a foreigner takes her husband’s nationality and may resume American citizenship only under specified conditions after the marriage ends. The Court said the statute’s language is explicit and not limited to Americans living abroad. It held that Congress has the authority to address nationality as part of national and international relations and that marriage to a foreign subject, voluntarily entered, may be treated as equivalent to expatriation while it continues. The Court therefore affirmed the denial of registration.

Real world impact

As a practical matter, the ruling lets local election authorities deny voter registration to American-born women who, by marrying a foreign subject, are treated as having taken their husband’s nationality. The decision enforces the 1907 law’s consequences for citizenship during marriage and underscores Congress’s power over national relations.

Dissents or concurrances

One Justice, McReynolds, expressed the view that the Court lacked jurisdiction to decide the case, which is a separate procedural objection noted in the opinion.