Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
1790 Naturalization Act
The Naturalization Acts. Essays
Race and ethnicity in the criminal justice system essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: 1790 Naturalization Act
Prior to the case of United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, the United States implemented a naturalization law known as the Naturalization Act of 1790, in which citizenship would only be granted to “any alien, being a free white person.” And so the prerequisite cases was born, in which any immigrants who wanted to be granted citizenship would have to prove in the court of law that they were indeed “white”. The court would either use scientific evidence or common knowledge to determine if someone was white or not. But not both, due to the In Re Najour case of 1909, in which In Re Najour a dark skin syrian, was granted citizenship after proving that he was indeed “white” in which he won due to scientific evidence. But would of never been granted …show more content…
Bhagat Singh Thind in 1923, the United States was attempting to revoke Bhagat Singh Thind’s naturalization of citizenship. In which Thind filed for naturalization under the Naturalization of 1906, that only granted “free white persons” and person of “African descent” to become citizens. The case was taken to the United States of the Supreme Court, in which Thind argued that he was indeed white because his people was part of the Aryan race and that he was a “high caste Hindu, of full blood Indian”, therefore making him part of the caucasian race.
Thind was confident in his argument prior to the case, due to a prior case of Ozawa v . United States, in which Takao Ozawa, a native born Japanese was denied citizenship even though he was physically white and had live in America for over 20 years. In which the court denied him citizenship due to scientific evidence, for the court only recognized a white person to be a member of the caucasian race, in which Ozawa was clearly
…show more content…
Does it mean that race is indeed not natural, for it does not exist in nature? Was race merely a social construct that was created in society by the usage of the law? To realize the possibility that race may have in fact be a social construction, would challenge the very nature and social hierarchy of which America has lived by for so long. So the only logical thing to do at that time, was for the court to reject scientific evidence completely, in order to maintain this hierarchy that whites will always be dominant and everyone else would be deemed inferior.
The case of United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, had a profound detrimental impact in which all former Asian Indians prior to this case had their citizenships revoked. And as a result they lost everything, from their homes, to their business, to their very lives in which they were so accustomed to of living in. A devastating impact that severely crippled Asian Indians lives in America, until it was finally revoked and revised with President Harry Truman signing the Luce-Celler Act of 1946 that allowed Asian Indians and Filipinos to once more immigrate to America freely and become
Within three months, Justice Sutherland authored a similarly unfavorable ruling in a Supreme Court case concerning the petition for naturalization of a Sikh immigrant from the Punjab region in British India, who identified himself as "a high caste Hindu of full Indian blood" in his petition, United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind. The upshot of this ruling was that like the Japanese, "high-caste Hindus, of full Indian blood" were not "free white persons" and were racially ineligible for naturalized citizenship. To support this conclusion, Justice Sutherland reiterated Ozawa's holding that the words "white person" in the naturalization act were "synonymous
America is a nation consisting of many immigrants: it has its gates opened to the world. These immigrants transition smoothly and slowly from settlement, to assimilation then citizenship. These immigrants are first admitted lawfully as permanent residents before they naturalize to become full citizens. In her book “Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America”, the historian Mae Ngai draws our attention to the history of immigration and citizenship in America. Her book examines an understudied period of immigration regulation between 1924 and 1965.
Since 1790, the United States started to grant limited naturalization to immigrants of free white persons through the Naturalization Act of 1790 and established racial qualification to national citizenships. Immigrants, regardless of who they were, need to prove that they were of white race. This lead to the moment when defining who was white was through either scientific method or common knowledge. Into the early 19th and late 20th century, there were numerous of terms to include whiteness and non-racial qualification for immigration to the United States. As immigrants try to show how they were white, there were court cases, Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178 (1922) and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923), which regarded as one of the landmark cases of the United States Supreme Court especially regarding naturalization of immigrants.
The case of The People Vs. Hall in 1854, was about George Hall a white miner, who murdered Ling Sing a chinese miner, over a dispute that they had. It was disputed in the California Supreme Court in 1854, with the majority of opinion delivered by Chief Justice Hugh Murray with the concurrence of Justice Solomon Heydenfeldt. In the hearing, George hall appealed to the verdict, arguing that the 394th section of the Act Concerning Civil Cases provides that no Indian or Negro shall be allowed to testify as a witness in any action or åproceeding in which a white person is a party. The issue with this appeal was that the 394th section of the Act Concerning Civil Cases, did not included chinese or any other different ethnic background that was not listed in that section. For Chinese did not immigrated to America, until 1852, in which they were coming for work after the economic fall out of the Opium War of 1840.
Johnson uses this law as a temporary fix for few citizens are outspoken. silence the Indian group and their fight for civil rights. This was a waste of time and just prolonged the suffering of the Indian culture. A case known as Martinez v. Santa Clara Pueblo dealt with the laws under which they never took their civil rights seriously. The case was based on simple membership in Indian tribes with the intent of keeping blood line pure. Interracial couples were around in this time period and it became so common the problem of pure blood lines were becoming contaminated. The Santa Clara Pueblo has been a recognized federal government for more than one-hundred years. Santa Clara adopted a membership law and as a government, they regulate their own domestic relations that are reported to their own individual government under the United States. They determine citizenship through blood ratios and clear descendants. Martinez’s son was bi-racial, the mother was Native American and her husband was not Native American, under the law the father was not allowed into the tribe. The case covers the unequal rights Native Americans are facing but bullying within the tribes was evident when it was clear it was necessary to keep the blood line pure.The dissent of the case explained that if the constitution rights were to be given to individual citizen it will
Speaking on my behalf why don’t so called African Americans resemble Africans from Africa? The African American is known as an artificial construct. Believe it or not African Americans are the indigenous to the Americans. This includes North America, South America and its surrounding islands. According, to the Dred Scott vs. Sanford in (1857) exemplifies that if your ancestors were black and were imported into the U.S. and sold as slaves. Then they would be considering not being a citizenship to America. In other words African Americans only are citizens in name but not law. For those who still boastfully claim that the 14th amendment made them citizens then how do you explain the Naturalization Act in (1870). That came afterwards what was the purpose of that act. Altogether growing up all my life all I ever heard was all blacks believed that their ancestors were slaves, truth is just because prejudice went on during slavery times and racism that does not mean that all of our ancestors were slaves. What do I mean by all of this we’ll Ehrenreich emphasizes that she knows exactly what her ancestors were doing 2,000 years ago. Remember the story in the bible where God ask Abraham to count the stars in the sky, well Abraham try and did not succeed. No man earth can count how many stars are in the sky no matter how much knowledge they may have with that being said this is why
...y Burnett, “The Noncitizen National and the Law of American Empire” , “in Major Problems in American Immigration History, ed. Mae M Ngai and Jon Gjerde (Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2013),278
Following the 1890’s, the world began to undergo the first stages of globalization. Countries and peoples, who, until now, were barely connected, now found themselves neighbors in a planet vastly resembling a global village. Despite the idealized image of camaraderie and brotherhood this may seem to suggest, the reality was only discrimination and distrust. Immigration to new lands became a far more difficult affair, as emigrants from different nations came to be viewed as increasingly foreign. In the white-dominated society of the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the only way to truly count oneself as American was to become “white”. For this reason, the idea of race, a socially constructed issue with no real physical basis, has become one of the most defining factors which shape immigration and assimilation in the United States.
The United States is a racialized society, with racism deeply embedded into its history. The most renowned display of racism in the United States is the enslavement of Africans by white people. This is one of the many instances that highlights the government’s implementation of institutional racism, which has been experienced by people of many different races. In this documentary, American citizenship, the Federal Housing Administration, and real estate appear to be the focal portrayals of institutional racism. For hundreds of years, being white was essential to gaining American citizenship. In 1922, Ozawa, a Japanese businessman attempted to gain citizenship. However, the Supreme Court denied his request, stating that he was scientifically classified as Mongolian, not white. Three months later, a South Asian man, Thind, proved to the Court that he was white because he was scientifically classified as Caucasian, and therefore
“Black, white and brown are merely skin colors. But we attach to them meanings and assumptions, even laws that create enduring social inequality.”(Adelman and Smith 2003). When I first heard this quote in this film, I was not surprised about it. Each human is unique compared to the other; however, we are group together based on uncontrollable physical characteristics. Eyes, hair texture, and skin tone became a way to separate who belongs where. Each group was labeled as having the same traits. African Americans were physically superior, Asians were the more intellectual race, and Indians were the advanced farmers. Certain races became superior to the next and society shaped their hierarchy on what genes you inherited.
Erika, Lee. "U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Laws and Issues." Journal of American Ethnic History. Vol. 20. Issue 2 (2001): n. page. Web. 18 Apr. 2013.
Race has no biological meaning. There is only one human race; there are no subspecies, no single defining characteristic, traits, or even gene, separates one “race” from another. Instead of being a biological concept, race is a social construct, and a relatively modern one at that. It was created to give light-skinned Europeans an advantage by making the white race superior and all others inferior. Throughout its history, the concept of race has served this purpose well.
...f American citizens of Japanese ancestry and resident aliens from Japan.The Japanese attempted to fight back and prove their innocence.The most famous case, Korematsu v. United States shows that. According to Kelly “The Korematsu case was significant because it ruled that the United States government had the right to exclude and force people from designated areas based on their race.” The decision was 6-3 that the need to protect the United States from spying and other wartime acts was more important than Korematsu's individual rights,better yet any Japanese-American’s rights. To cover up the fact that it was mass hysteria the paranoid Americans claimed it was justified by the Army’s claims that Japanese Americans were radio-signaling enemy ships from shore and were most likely disloyal. The court called the incarceration a “military necessity”(Korematsu Institute).
In his address to a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson declared freedom of the seas in times of peace and war. Looking back, it seems ridiculous to think that anyone could challenge the right of individuals to navigate the oceans freely. However, fast-forward to the twenty-first century and we can see an analogous debate over the issue of immigration rights, with territorial borders being the main topic of discussion. The system of immigration in the United States is complex and oftentimes restrictive, and while revisions to the system usually include increasing quotas or other solutions to let in certain groups of people who deserve special consideration (such as those whose skills are needed in a particular field), they are still very limited solutions. The obvious question that arises from letting in some people but not others is that of fairness. Is the accident of birth or luck of being in the right place at the right time enough to justify restrictive citizenship to a select few? I would argue not. I intend to argue that a commitment to human rights entails the position that borders ought to be open in order to guarantee other human rights, especially the right to migrate.
Will and in this essay the author challenges the citizenship status of children born to illegal immigrants. Will argues that the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to any person born in the United States, is being misinterpreted. He explains how this misinterpretation leads to the actual act of illegal immigration. For example, by essentially rewarding the children of illegal immigrants with an American citizenship Will demonstrates how this provides an incentive for illegal immigration. The author makes clear the idea that when the 14th Amendment was written in 1866 it could not have included illegal immigrants since that concept did not exist at that time. He continues by using Indians as an example of people not included in the 14th Amendment since Indians and their children owed allegiance to their tribes. Finally, the author uses a decision by the Supreme Court in 1884 that declared both person and country must consent to the citizenship; therefore, if the source is illegal then the child should not be considered a