The Michigan Law Review's Survey of Books Related to the Law provides an annual opportunity to consider not only a range of legal issues and views, but also to think about the range of ways we argue about and study the law. In this Foreword, I would like to suggest that we think not only about how we choose to argue, but also the potential consequences of those choices. When we study or argue about law and politics, we routinely and sensibly consider the possible unintended impact of particular substantive rules and policies. Here I suggest that we should attend as well to the potential indirect effects of our arguments themselves.
The American Dream is a trope with global reach. Although the “city upon a hill” may have lost some of its luster in recent years, the idea that America is a country where citizens can rise above “the fortuitous circumstances of birth or positon” largely continues to resonate. Professor Ayelet Shachar’s provocative new book, however, suggests otherwise.
In The Birthright Lottery, Shachar condemns birthright citizenship laws as a feudal anachronism analogous to an inherited-property regime. For her, birthright citizenship in a prosperous nation confers a morally arbitrary windfall that determines life opportunities. Shachar further argues that in a world of material inequalities, the winners of the “birthright lottery” live large at the losers’ expense, often with deadly results.
Shachar’s arguments, if embraced, profoundly undermine both the feasibility and the desirability of the American Dream. If birthright citizenship is akin to entailed property, it is impossible to meaningfully exercise the agency embodied in the American Dream. And if birthright citizenship really is a zero-sum game, anybody living the American Dream is necessarily responsible for somebody else’s nightmare.