Sessions v Morales-Santana A Contracting State shall grant its nationality to a person, not born in the territory of a Contracting State, who would otherwise be stateless, if the nationality of one of his parents at the time of the person’s birth was that of that State.39 The right to a nationality further finds support under US constitutional law. For example, in Trop v Dulles, the Supreme Court held that Congress does not have the power to de-nationalise and, even if it had such power, de-nationalisation would be a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution. 40 Even if the Court had declined to discuss the treaty obligations of the US Government, it should have discussed its own precedent on de-nationalisation. CONCLUSION By making it harder for some unwed, US citizen mothers to pass on their nationality to their children, the US Supreme Court has raised the risk of statelessness for some children born abroad. Some children who would have had the right to a nationality via their US citizen mother before Morales-Santana have now lost that right. In Morales-Santana, the Court gave more weight to abstract concepts of gender equality than to the human right to a nationality, creating a troubling precedent. 39 ibid art 4(1). 40 Trop v Dulles (n 20). The Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. 335