DOCSLIB.ORG

Intermarriage, Land, and Meanings of Citizenship and Marital Naturalization/Expatriation in the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intermarriage, Land, and Meanings of Citizenship and Marital Naturalization/Expatriation in the United States UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones 5-1-2019 Beyond Suffrage: Intermarriage, Land, and Meanings of Citizenship and Marital Naturalization/Expatriation in the United States Shiori Yamamoto Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations Part of the Gender and Sexuality Commons, Law Commons, United States History Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons Repository Citation Yamamoto, Shiori, "Beyond Suffrage: Intermarriage, Land, and Meanings of Citizenship and Marital Naturalization/Expatriation in the United States" (2019). UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 3706. http://dx.doi.org/10.34917/15778578 This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BEYOND SUFFRAGE: INTERMARRIAGE, LAND, AND MEANINGS OF CITIZENSHIP AND MARITAL NATURALIZATON/EXPATRIATION IN THE UNITED STATES By Shiori Yamamoto Bachelor of Laws Hitotsubashi University 2000 Bachelor of Arts – Women’s Studies The University of Arizona 2004 Master of Arts – Women’s Studies The University of Arizona 2006 Master of Arts – Information Resources and Library Science The University of Arizona 2009 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy – History Department of History College of Liberal Arts The Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas May 2019 Copyright 2019 Shiori Yamamoto All Rights Reserved Dissertation Approval The Graduate College The University of Nevada, Las Vegas April 19, 2019 This dissertation prepared by Shiori Yamamoto entitled Beyond Suffrage: Intermarriage, Land, and Meanings of Citizenship and Marital Naturalization/Expatriation in the United States is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy – History Department of History Maria Raquél Casas, Ph.D. Kathryn Hausbeck Korgan, Ph.D. Examination Committee Chair Graduate College Dean Joanne Goodwin, Ph.D. Examination Committee Member David Tanenhaus, Ph.D. Examination Committee Member Anita Tijerina Revilla, Ph.D. Graduate College Faculty Representative ii Abstract This dissertation investigates how the laws of marital naturalization/expatriation, namely the Citizenship Act of 1855, the Expatriation Act of 1907, and the Cable Act of 1922 and its amendments throughout the 1930s, impacted the lives of women who married foreigners, especially in the American West, and demonstrates how women directly and indirectly challenged the practice of marital naturalization/expatriation. Those laws demanded women who married foreigners take the nationality of their husbands depending on the race of women and their husbands, making married women’s citizenship dependent on that of their husbands. Particularly under the Expatriation Act of 1907, all American women who married foreigners lost their U.S. citizenship by the mere fact of marriage. This, in particular, negatively affected women in the West, where international and/or interracial marriage was not uncommon and U.S. citizenship was closely tied not only to suffrage but also to land ownership and employment. By examining various issues women faced as a consequence of losing U.S. citizenship, this dissertation reveals what it meant for American women to lose formal U.S. citizenship, even if it was only second-class citizenship, and how gender, race, class, and the nationality of married couples complicated the idea of U.S. citizenship. iii Acknowledgement A seed of this dissertation was first planted during the first semester in my master’s program in Women’s Studies at the University of Arizona. From there, it grew into term papers, a master’s thesis, conference papers, and finally this dissertation. Over the years, my home department/discipline and institution transitioned to History at UNLV, and instead of the green Sonoran Desert, the Mojave Desert became a familiar landscape. This transition was never easy and I struggled a lot to adjust to the new environment, but with support and encouragement of a number of people, I was finally able to complete this dissertation. It is impossible to acknowledge all of them, but let me name a few. First of all, I would like to thank my dissertation committee members: Dr. Maria Raquél Casas, Dr. Joanne Goodwin, Dr. David Tanenhaus, Dr. Anita Tijerina Revilla, and Dr. Sue Fawn Chung, who had to leave the committee at the last moment. My committee members were always open to have meetings with me and inspired me to reach a higher level. From the moment I was accepted to UNLV, Dr. Casas, the chair of my committee, encouraged me tremendously and patiently supported me when I was going through very rough times. I would never have been able to complete this dissertation without her support and encouragement. I would also like to thank my teaching mentor Dr. John Curry. His informal advice also enormously helped me to survive the program. I am very grateful of all of these faculty members’ support, encouragement, and inspiration. My mental health support team Dr. Joseph Kithas and Dr. Marilyn Hoyer were absolutely critical to maintain my emotional stability over the years. Psychiatrist Dr. Kithas always spent a good amount of time each session and genuinely engaged with me. Dr. Hoyer offered me iv extraordinary support especially when I was having a hard time adjusting to the new environment of Las Vegas. I am truly fortunate to have them as my mental health support team. I am also indebted to many of my friends. Among them, Leslie Hunter and Mark House made my life in the Mojave Desert very colorful and enjoyable. My late neighbor, Jerry Brazelton, always fed me with his homemade, hearty meals, and his vivid life story of living on a ranch in Colorado was extremely interesting and funny and complemented my book knowledge of lives in the American West. My long-time friend Alexa Priddy and I visited each other a number of times between Denver and Las Vegas. The pleasant times with her and the green landscape of Denver always soothed my worn-out spirit and recharged my energy. Jez Gaddoura, my film buddy, patiently listened to me when I was transitioning to the Mojave Desert. Finally but not least, my mother Mariko Yamamoto. Although she lives thousands of miles away, she always believed in me to achieve a doctorate degree. In addition, since my childhood, she taught me to question the meanings of marriage. Without her inspiration, I would not have chosen marriage and citizenship as the topic of my dissertation. I do not know how to fully express my gratitude to her, but let me say this: どうもありがとう. The people I named here are just a few of my great support networks. I would like to acknowledge a lot more people who encouraged me, but it would take a few more pages if I did. I hope you know that I am talking about you; thank you. v Table of Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................. iii Acknowledgement ......................................................................................................................... iv Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 Defaulted Revolutionary Ideology: Development of U.S. Citizenship from the Colonial to Revolutionary Eras ......................................................................... 27 Chapter 3 Long Nineteenth Century in the American West: Manifest Destiny, Chinese Immigration, and the Policies on Race, Gender, and Citizenship ........................... 61 Chapter 4 Homestead, Suffrage, and U.S. Citizenship: Struggles of American Women Who Married White Immigrants under the Expatriation Act................................ 108 Chapter 5 Conflicting Desires: Exclusion of Japanese Immigrants and Protection of Their White American Wives................................................................................ 140 Chapter 6 “Just Beginning to Be Citizens”: Emerging Critiques of Marital Naturalization/Expatriation and Women’s Political Consciousness ..................... 174 Chapter 7 Re-Codifying the Expatriation Act: Problems of the Cable Act of 1922 and Repatriation of Married Women and WWI Soldiers ............................................ 212 Chapter 8 Coda: “Will Not Erase the Past, but Will Highlight the Injustices of the National Experience and Help Build a Better, Stronger, and More Equal Nation” .................................................................................................................. 253 Appendix ............................................................................................................................... 261 Bibliography ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IMMIGRATION LAW BASICS How Does the United States Immigration System Work?
    IMMIGRATION LAW BASICS How does the United States immigration system work? Multiple agencies are responsible for the execution of immigration laws. o The Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) was abolished in 2003. o Department of Homeland Security . USCIS . CBP . ICE . Attorney General’s role o Department of Justice . EOIR . Attorney General’s role o Department of State . Consulates . Secretary of State’s role o Department of Labor . Employment‐related immigration Our laws, while historically pro‐immigration, have become increasingly restrictive and punitive with respect to noncitizens – even those with lawful status. ‐ Pro‐immigration history of our country o First 100 Years: 1776‐1875 ‐ Open door policy. o Act to Encourage Immigration of 1864 ‐ Made employment contracts binding in an effort to recruit foreign labor to work in factories during the Civil War. As some states sought to restrict immigration, the Supreme Court declared state laws regulating immigration unconstitutional. ‐ Some early immigration restrictions included: o Act of March 3, 1875: excluded convicts and prostitutes o Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882: excluded persons from China (repealed in 1943) o Immigration Act of 1891: Established the Bureau of Immigration. Provided for medical and general inspection, and excluded people based on contagious diseases, crimes involving moral turpitude and status as a pauper or polygamist ‐ More big changes to the laws in the early to mid 20th century: o 1903 Amendments: excluded epileptics, insane persons, professional beggars, and anarchists. o Immigration Act of 1907: excluded feeble minded persons, unaccompanied children, people with TB, mental or physical defect that might affect their ability to earn a living.
    [Show full text]
  • Excluded! Chinese Immigration to the United States Inquiry and Investigation NAGC Curriculum Award-Winner
    PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING Engagement IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES Excluded! Chinese Immigration to the United States Inquiry and Investigation NAGC Curriculum Award-Winner Definition Teacher Manual Shelagh A. Gallagher Dana L. Plowden Resolution Debriefing Royal Fireworks Press Unionville, New York Problem Narrative: The Storyline of Excluded! Ideally, the direction of a Problem-Based Learning unit is decided through the questions students ask. To some extent, this is made manageable by the structure of the opening scenario presented during Problem Engagement. The opening scenario is carefully designed to point students in the direction of some predictable questions. For example, it would be hard to avoid asking questions about why so many Chinese immigrated to America in the late 1800s or why American citizens grew so prejudicial against them. The narrative below and the lesson plans in this unit respond to these more predictable questions and address other desirable learning outcomes. They also provide a helpful guide for teachers new to PBL. Experienced PBL teachers are encouraged to use this unit as a framework, selecting lessons that fit the students’ questions (and, as above, many should fit) and adding other lessons to address other questions. It would be easy, for instance, to integrate discussion of how countries should approach establishing immigration laws and requirements for citizenship, or to increase emphasis on racism or poor working conditions. Problem Engagement During Problem Engagement, students are introduced to the situation they will be exploring during the unit. As the problem opens, students take on the role of Congressmen and -women from California in 1892. A memo crosses their desk, asking for their final comment on a bill that is about to be submitted for debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S3451
    May 26, 2011 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S3451 SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS Mink, the first Asian-American Congress- (2) encourages the celebration during woman, and Norman Y. Mineta, the first Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month of Asian-American member of a presidential the significant contributions Asian-Ameri- SENATE RESOLUTION 200—RECOG- cabinet, have made significant strides in the cans and Pacific Islanders have made to the NIZING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF political and military realms; United States; and THE DESIGNATION OF THE Whereas the Presidential Cabinet of the (3) recognizes that the Asian-American and Obama Administration includes a record 3 Pacific Islander community strengthens and MONTH OF MAY AS ASIAN/PA- Asian-Americans, including Secretary of En- enhances the rich diversity of the United CIFIC AMERICAN HERITAGE ergy Steven Chu, Secretary of Commerce States. MONTH Gary Locke, and Secretary of Veterans Af- f Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. INOUYE, fairs Eric Shinseki; Whereas in 2011, the Congressional Asian SENATE RESOLUTION 201—EX- Mrs. MURRAY, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, and Mr. Pacific American Caucus, a bicameral cau- PRESSING THE REGRET OF THE REID of Nevada) submitted the fol- cus of Members of Congress advocating on SENATE FOR THE PASSAGE OF lowing resolution; which was referred behalf of Asian-Americans and Pacific Is- DISCRIMINATORY LAWS to the Committee on the Judiciary: landers, includes 30 Members of Congress; AGAINST THE CHINESE IN AMER- S. RES. 200 Whereas Asian-Americans and Pacific Is- ICA, INCLUDING THE CHINESE Whereas each May, the people of the landers have made history by assuming of- EXCLUSION ACT fice in a number of new and historically sig- United States join together to pay tribute to Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Essay—The History of Immigration Law in the United States
    HANDOUT A Background Essay—The History of Immigration Law in the United States Read the background essay and answer the critical thinking questions at the Directions: end. In addition, formulate your own questions about the content discussed. In the modern era, nation-states are defined as Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution much by their borders as by their unique laws, empowers the Congress to “Establish a forms of government, and distinct national Uniform Rule of Naturalization.” The first cultures. Since the early years of the United national law concerning immigration was the States’ history, the federal government has Naturalization Act of 1790, which stated that sought, with varying degrees of success, to limit any free white person who had resided in the and define the nature and scale of immigration U.S. for at least two years could apply for full into the country. In the first seventy years of the citizenship. Congress also required applicants nation’s history, immigration was left largely to demonstrate “good character” and swear an unchecked; Congress focused its attention oath to uphold the Constitution. Blacks were on defining the terms by which immigrants ineligible for citizenship. could gain the full legal rights of citizenship. In 1795, naturalization standards were Beginning in the 1880s, however, Congress began changed to require five years’ prior residence in to legislate on the national and ethnic makeup of the U.S., and again in 1798 to require 14 years’ immigrants. Lawmakers passed laws forbidding residence. The 1798 revision was passed amidst certain groups from entering the country, and the anti-French fervor of the Quasi-War and restricted the number of people who could enter sought to limit the influence of foreign-born from particular nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Act of 1924 from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Immigration Act of 1924 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Immigration Act of 1924, or Johnson–Reed Act, including the National Origins Act, and Asian Exclusion Act (Pub.L. 68-139, 43 Stat. 153, enacted May 26, 1924), was a United States federal law that limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, down from the 3% cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921, according to the Census of 1890. It superseded the 1921 Emergency Quota Act. The law was aimed at further restricting the Southern and Eastern Europeans, mainly Jews fleeing persecution in Poland and Russia, who were immigrating in large numbers starting in the 1890s, as well as prohibiting the immigration President Coolidge signs the of Middle Easterners, East Asians and Indians. According to the U.S. immigration act on the White House Department of State Office of the Historian, "In all its parts, the most basic South Lawn along with appropriation purpose of the 1924 Immigration Act was to preserve the ideal of American bills for the Veterans Bureau. John J. homogeneity."[1] Congressional opposition was minimal. Pershing is on the President's right. Contents 1 Provisions 2 History 3 Results 4 See also 5 References 6 Sources 7 External links Provisions The Immigration Act made permanent the basic limitations on immigration into the United States established in 1921 and modified the National Origins Formula established then. In conjunction with the Immigration Act of 1917, it governed American immigration policy until the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which revised it completely.
    [Show full text]
  • The Royal Regulation of England's French Residents During Wartime, 1294-1377
    This is a repository copy of A matter of trust : the royal regulation of England's French residents during wartime, 1294-1377. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/100182/ Version: Published Version Article: Lambert, Bart Roger Denise and Ormrod, William Mark orcid.org/0000-0003-0044-726X (2016) A matter of trust : the royal regulation of England's French residents during wartime, 1294-1377. Historical Research. pp. 208-226. ISSN 0950-3471 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2281.12127 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ A matter of trust: the royal regulation of England’s French residents during wartime, 1294–1377* Bart Lambert Durham University W. Mark Ormrod University of York Abstract This study focuses on how the English crown identified and categorized French-born people in the kingdom during the preliminaries and first stage of the Hundred Years War. Unlike the treatment of alien priories and nobles holding lands on both sides of the Channel, the attitude to laypeople became more positive as the period progressed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nativist Lobby Three Faces of Intolerance
    The Nativist Lobby Three Faces of Intolerance A Report from the Southern Poverty Law Center Montgomery, Alabama February 2009 The Nativist Lobby Three Faces of Intolerance By Heidi BeiricH • edited By Mark Potok the southern poverty law center is a nonprofit organization that combats hate, intolerance and discrimination through education and litigation. Its Intelligence Project, which prepared this report and also produces the quarterly investigative magazine Intelligence Report, tracks the activities of hate groups and the nativist movement and monitors militia and other extremist anti- government activity. Its Teaching Tolerance project helps foster respect and understanding in the classroom. Its litigation arm files lawsuits against hate groups for the violent acts of their members. MEDIA AND GENERAL INQUIRIES Mark Potok, Editor Heidi Beirich Southern Poverty Law Center 400 Washington Ave., Montgomery, Ala. (334) 956-8200 www.splcenter.org • www.intelligencereport.org • www.splcenter.org/blog This report was prepared by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center. The Center is supported entirely by private donations. No government funds are involved. © Southern Poverty Law Center. All rights reserved. southern poverty law center Table of Contents Preface 4 The Puppeteer: John Tanton and the Nativist Movement 5 FAIR: The Lobby’s Action Arm 9 CIS: The Lobby’s ‘Independent’ Think Tank 13 NumbersUSA: The Lobby’s Grassroots Organizer 18 southern poverty law center Editor’s Note By Mark Potok Three Washington, D.C.-based immigration-restriction organizations stand at the nexus of the American nativist movement: the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and NumbersUSA.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Law and the Myth of Comprehensive Registration
    Immigration Law and the Myth of Comprehensive Registration Nancy Morawetz†* and Natasha Fernández-Silber** This Article identifies an insidious misconception in immigration law and policy: the myth of comprehensive registration. According to this myth — proponents of which include members of the Supreme Court, federal and state officials, and commentators on both sides of the immigration federalism debate — there exists a comprehensive federal alien registration system; this scheme obligates all non-citizens in the United States to register and carry registration cards at all times, or else face criminal sanction. In truth, no such system exists today, nor has one ever existed in American history. Yet, federal agencies like U.S. Border Patrol refer to such a system to justify arrests and increase enforcement statistics; the Department of Justice points to the same mythic system to argue statutory preemption of state immigration laws (rather than confront the discriminatory purpose and effect of those laws); and, states trot it out in an attempt to turn civil immigration offenses into criminal infractions. Although this legal fiction is convenient for a variety of disparate political institutions, it is far from convenient for those who face wrongful arrest and detention based on nothing more than failure to carry proof of status. Individuals in states with aggressive “show me your papers” immigration laws or under the presence of U.S. Border Patrol are particularly at risk. In an effort to dispel this dangerous misconception, this Article reviews the history of America’s experimentation with registration laws and the † Copyright © 2014 Nancy Morawetz and Natasha Fernández-Silber.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethical Aspects of the National Origins Act
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1944 The Ethical Aspects of the National Origins Act Mary Grace Patterson Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Patterson, Mary Grace, "The Ethical Aspects of the National Origins Act" (1944). Master's Theses. 683. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/683 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1944 Mary Grace Patterson 7.· ., .• ~ ETHICAL ASPECTS OF THE NATIONAL ORIGINS ACT BY SISTER MARY GRACE PATTERSON, O.S.B. A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF .A,RTS IN LOYOLA UNIVERSITY DECEMBER 1944 VITA. Sister Mary Grace Patterson, Q.S.B. was born in Leadville, Colorado, February 1, 1908. She was graduated from St. Scholastica Academy, Canon City, Colorado, June, 1926. In Septembe~ 1926, she entered the Order of St. Benedict in Chicago, Illinois. The Bachelor of Philosophy degree with a major in English was conferred by De Paul University, August, 1934. From 1936 to 1944 the writer has been engaged in teaching at St. Soholastica High School. During the past five years she has devoted her time to graduate study at Loyola University.
    [Show full text]
  • THE 1882 PROJECT a Nonpartisan, Grassroots Effort to Address the Chinese Exclusion Laws
    THE 1882 PROJECT A nonpartisan, grassroots effort to address the Chinese Exclusion Laws What are the Chinese Exclusion Laws? The Chinese Exclusion Laws are a series of eight laws Congress passed between 1870 and 1904 that discriminated against persons of Chinese descent based solely on their race. In 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which imposed a ten-year moratorium on Chinese labor immigration, which was later expanded to apply to all persons of Chinese descent. Congress revisited the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1884, 1888, 1892, 1902, and 1904, each time imposing increasingly severe restrictions on immigration and naturalization. Although the Chinese Exclusion Laws were repealed in 1943 as a war measure after China became a World War II ally of the United States, Congress has never expressly acknowledged that the laws singling out and ostracizing Chinese persons violated fundamental civil rights. What significance and impact did the Chinese Exclusion Laws have? The six decades of anti- Chinese legislation contradicted the Declaration of Independence’s basic founding principle that all persons are created equal, and the guarantees of the 14th and 15th amendments. The Congressional debates accompanying the laws condoned anti-Chinese attitudes by frequently portraying Chinese immigrants as “aliens, not to be trusted with political rights” and not able to assimilate in America. By directly targeting persons of Chinese descent for physical and political exclusion, the laws legitimized the political alienation and persecution of Chinese laborers and settlers. In California alone, there were over 200 “roundups” to physically expel Chinese persons. The laws affected the ability of Chinese persons to pursue life in America without fear, and impaired the establishment of Chinese family life in America.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Law" Mathew J
    Florida Law Review Volume 68 | Issue 1 Article 4 October 2016 Disaggregating "Immigration Law" Mathew J. Lindsay Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr Part of the Immigration Law Commons Recommended Citation Mathew J. Lindsay, Disaggregating "Immigration Law", 68 Fla. L. Rev. 179 (2016). Available at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol68/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida Law Review by an authorized administrator of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lindsay: Disaggregating "Immigration Law" DISAGGREGATING “IMMIGRATION LAW” Matthew J. Lindsay* Abstract Courts and scholars have long noted the constitutional exceptionalism of the federal immigration power, decried the injustice it produces, and appealed for greater constitutional protection for noncitizens. This Article builds on this robust literature while focusing on a particularly critical conceptual and doctrinal obstacle to legal reform—the notion that laws governing the rights of noncitizens to enter and remain within the United States comprise a distinct body of “immigration laws” presumed to be part and parcel of foreign affairs and national security. This Article argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent immigration jurisprudence suggests a willingness to temper, and perhaps even retire, that presumption. In particular, the majority opinions in Zadvydas v. Davis and Padilla v. Kentucky evidence a growing skepticism among the Justices that the regulation of noncitizens comprises a discrete, constitutionally privileged domain of distinctly “political” subject matter that is properly buffered against judicial scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • ASIAN-AMERICAN TIMELINE (Prepared by Dr
    1 ASIAN-AMERICAN TIMELINE (prepared by Dr. Bonnie Khaw-Posthuma) 1521 Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan claims the Phillipines in the name of the Spanish crown; colonial rule begins in 1565; first Filipinos reportedly arrive in California in 1587. 1790 Congress passes the Naturalization Act – granting U.S. citizenship to all “free white” persons. 1834 Afong Moy, the first Chinese woman known to have visited the U.S. is exhibited in a theater in New York. 1839-1842 China signs the Treaty of Nanjing –opening Chinese ports to trade by Western and later Japanese powers. 1843 Japanese citizen Nakahama Manjiro becomes the 1st Japanese individual to land in the U.S. 1848 First Chinese (two men, one woman) immigrate to the U.S. and land in San Francisco; discovery of gold leads to Chinese immigration to America (also known as “Gold Mountain”). 1852 Lured by the gold rush, more than 20,000 Chinese arrive in California (it was a myth that all Chinese wished to get rich quickly and return—only 50% did). 1853 Several hundred years of isolation end as Commodore Matthew Perry of the U.S. forces Japan to open its door to foreign commerce. 1854 People vs. Hall, a California case, rules that Chinese cannot testify for or against white persons in court. 1860 A Californian law bars Chinese-Americans, Indians, and African- Americans from public schools. 1865 Plans for the first transcontinental railroad in the U.S. are developed, and the Central Pacific Railroad begins hiring Chinese laborers. 1870 Congress grants naturalization rights to free whites and people of African descent, omitting mention of Asian (or as they call it “Oriental”) races.
    [Show full text]