The U.S. Supreme Court case Rogers v. Bellei in 1970 revolved around the citizenship status of Aldo Mario Bellei, who was born abroad to an American mother and a non-American father. The court had to decide whether Congress could impose conditions on the citizenship of individuals like Bellei, who were citizens at birth because of their parents but not by virtue of being born within the territory of the United States. The majority opinion held that such persons are not granted protection under Section 1 (the Citizenship Clause) of the Fourteenth Amendment and therefore Congress can indeed place stipulations on their citizenship rights - in this case requiring residency in America for a certain period before turning twenty-eight years old or risk losing US nationality. This ruling affirmed that there is a constitutional difference between Fourteenth Amendment citizens and those acquiring citizenship by descent.

In the dissenting opinion for Rogers v. Bellei, Justice Hugo Black argued that the majority's decision violated a fundamental principle of American democracy: that all citizens should be treated equally under the law. He contended that Congress does not have the power to revoke citizenship once it has been granted, and he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 1 of Fourteenth Amendment as only protecting those born or naturalized in America. Instead, he believed this section guarantees equal protection to all U.S citizens regardless their birthplace or circumstances surrounding their acquisition of citizenship. Furthermore, Justice Black expressed concern about potential misuse of such power by Congress and warned against creating different classes among U.S citizens based on how they obtained their status.