Immigrant Dreams, American Realities
Shania Khoo Jiahui Shen
Im/migrants and im/migration to the United States have long been dominated by discourses and narratives that romanticizes the United States as a land of opportunity and place where im/migrants can fulfill the American Dream. In our zine, we will explore the history and narratives of im/migration through a critical Asian/American perspective. A zine is an alternative, self-published magazine. Zines are crucial to counterculture, originally becoming popular through punk scenes in the 1970s as fans created zines about subcultures of punk and their favorite bands. Zines have historically been and are currently spaces for Asian/American im/migrants to delve into understanding history, politics, and identity, to scream and shout about feelings and feelings of living in a white supremacist world, and to be unapologetically who we are. As an Asian/American immigrant and child of immigrants, we focus on histories of Asian im/migration to to explore the history behind our own lived experiences and decenter narratives of white European immigrants. Through analyzing centuries of im/migration legislation, immigrants and their relationships to assimilation, and immigrant narratives of the past and present, we paint a critical narrative of what the “American Reality� entails. To understand the complicated nature of im/ migration to the United States, we must interrogate the forces of settler colonialism, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, policing of im/migrant bodies, imperialism, and cisheteropatriarchy in which it operates.
We hope that our zine will disrupt the decontextualized narratives and assumptions of im/migration and inspire more critical engagement with the oppressive forces which both incentivize and restrict im/migration. In our selection of im/migration legislation throughout history, we see legislation from outright exclusion to conditional acceptance that characterize the United States’ response to Asian im/migration. By detailing the causes, effects, and motivations behind such legislation, we take a critical look at the larger systems of colonization, imperialism, global capitalism, and racism that dictate and underline them. In our section analyzing the court cases Takao Ozawa v. United States and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, we interrogate the nature of white supremacy in the United States. The racialization of Asian immigrants and the court cases by Ozawa and Thind to gain American citizenship on the basis of whiteness demonstrate the incentive towards whiteness for such non-Black immigrants. Finally, our section on im/ migrant narratives in the past and present demonstrates the echoes of history. Non-white im/migrants have long been the subject of ingrained discourses, stereotypes, and portrayals in the white American consciousness. Indeed, such historical characterizations of im/migrants bear striking resemblance to narrative surrounding immigrants today. We invite you to join us in exploring, challenging, and questioning our notions of immigrant dreams and American realities.
SECTION ONE PAGE ACT 1875 CHINESE EXCLUSION ACT 1882 GENTLEMEN’S AGREEMENT 1907 IMMIGRATION ACT 1917 IMMIGRATION ACT 1924 TYDINGS MCDUFFIE ACT 1934 IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT 1965 REFUGEE ACT 1980 EXECUTIVE ORDER 13769
13
SECTION TWO
17
IMMIGRANTS ARE...
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
TAKAO OZAWA V. UNITED STATES 13 UNITED STATES V. BHAGAT SINGH THIND 15
...IMPORTANT TO THE ECONOMY ...CRIMINALS ...CARRYING DISEASES ...GOING TO OVER RUN THE COUNTRY
19 21 23 25
CONTENTS
4
TABLE OF
3
4 Page Act 1875
This law prohibited the importation of unfree laborers and women brought for “immoral purposes” but was enforced primarily against Chinese. Legislated amid the spread of anti-Chinese fervor from the west coast to the rest of the United States, this law was an early effort to restrict Asian immigration without categorically restricting Asian immigration on the basis of race and instead restricted select categories of persons whose labor was perceived as immoral or coerced.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
“...in determining whether the immigration of any subject of China, Japan, or any Oriental country, to the United States, is free and voluntary . . . it shall be the duty of the consulgeneral or consul of the United States . . . to ascertain whether such immigrant has entered into a contract or agreement for a term of service within the United States, for lewd and immoral purposes; and if there be such contract or agreement, the said consul-general or consul shall not deliver the required permit or certificate.”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Chinese women in particular were targeted as sex workers, as people believed they would transmit “Chinese diseases” to white clienteles. Orientalist misogyny is foundational to Chinese and Chinese American history. It is through these gendered (and violent) exclusions that the United States was able to simultaneously restrict the settlement of Chinese families and communities and maintain it’s image as a place open to anyone who wanted to come. This act was the end de facto open borders, and was the start of Orientalism in immigration policies, a framework that continues to exist in policies today. Orientalism is a term used to describe how the West has essentialized the Middle East, Asia, and North Africa as the “East” and the “Oriental,” thereby fabricating an “Oriental culture” that can be studied, depicted, and reproduced in order to uphold and protect imperialism in the East. Immigration policies around Chinese and other Asians are deeply tied to Orientalism, which have created and perpetuated discourses that “the Orient is a stage on which the whole East is confined” to make the Eastern world “less fearsome to the West” (Edward Said 363). Narratives of the “choice” to im/migrate often obscure the role of colonial coercions.
5 An Act to execute certain treaty stipulations relating to Chinese 1882
Better known as the Chinese Exclusion Act, this law signaled a major shift in US immigration policy from that of a relatively open door to growing restrictiveness. Chinese were the first targets, categorized by race and class, for severely limited legal entry. The 1882 law affirmed the 1790 Nationality Act’s bar against naturalization by Asians and was the first immigration law to be enforced actively.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
“...in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities within the territory” “from and after the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this act, and until the expiration of ten years next after the passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States be, and the same is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension it shall not be lawful for any Chinese laborer to come.” “SEC. 4: the collector of customs...shall...make a list of all such Chinese laborers...which shall be entered in registry-books to be kept for that purpose, in which shall be stated the name, age, occupation, last place of residence, physical marks of peculiarities, and all facts necessary for the identification of each of such Chinese laborers, which books shall be safely kept in the customhouse.”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS More like, the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers white people’s power and wealth within the territory stolen from Indigenous people who have been mass murdered, disenfranchised, and erased. Note: Chinese laborer. The class dimension of the Chinese Exclusion Act is often overshadowed. Lowly “unskilled” workers were ineligible while there were exceptions for merchants, diplomats, and students. When this law was passed, the US had no existing immigrant control infrastructure to enforce it. Immigration officials, passports, green cards, deportation policies these are all things that come about specifically to restrict Chinese immigrants, resulting in the first conception of “illegal immigrant” in the United States. And these processes of identification were deeply invasive as the Bureau of Immigration implemented the Bertillon system to document Chinese immigrants, which records measurements of limbs, ears, head, teeth, and genitalia, making identity switches impossible. This act explicitly argued for on racist bases such as “Oriental civilization” being incompatible with good ol American values and degrading the moral structure of the United States. And it must be noted that Western imperialism, particularly the British literally manufactured the opium addiction and ensuing poverty in order to oppress China and Chinese people in the 1700s, causing many Chinese laborers to emigrate from China and it is western imperialism that is informing the exclusion of Chinese laborers from the United States.
6 Gentlemen’s Agreement 1907
Increasing levels of Japanese immigration, in part to replace excluded Chinese agricultural workers, met with concerted opposition in California. To appease Californians and avoid an open breach with the rising world power of Japan, President Theodore Roosevelt brokered this diplomatic agreement whereby the Japanese government assumed responsibility for sharply restricting Japanese immigration, particularly that of laborers, so that Japanese American children could continue to attend integrated schools on the west coast.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
President Theodore Roosevelt letter to Victor Metcalf, Secretary of Commerce and Labor (1906): “the only way to prevent constant friction between the United States and Japan was to keep the movement of the citizens of each country into the other restricted as far as possible to students, travelers, business men, and the like; that inasmuch as no American laboring men were trying to get into Japan what was necessary was to prevent all immigration of Japanese laboring men – that is, of the Coolie class – into the United States; that I earnestly hoped his Government would stop their coolies, all their working men, from coming either to the United States or to Hawaii.”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Once again, the limitation of immigrants to “students, travelers, business men” demonstrates the classed nature of immigration -- allowances for immigrants who were generally upper class, restrictions for “unskilled” labor. This demonstrates the oft-contradictory driving forces of labor and immigration in the United States. Capitalists sought cheap and exploitable labor to maximize profits, and turned to Japanese immigrant labor after the Chinese Exclusion Act restricted their access to Chinese labor. However, nativists responded with violence and pushes to restrict such immigration, which would lead to the Gentleman’s Agreement. While the Gentlemen’s Agreement did bar Japanese laborers, overall it was actually unsuccessful at restricting Japanese immigration, as family members of Japanese people already in the US could still apply to immigrate to the US. Asian exclusion proponents continued to push against Japanese immigration, which would lead to future immigration restrictions such as the Immigration Acts of 1917 and 1924 (Lee 2015).
7 Immigration Act of 1917
This law is best known for its creation of a “barred zone” extending from the Middle East to Southeast Asia from which no persons were allowed to enter the United States. Its main restriction, however, consisted of a literacy test intended to reduce European immigration, with exemptions for those who could show they were fleeing persecution. This law also further clarified funding and administrative procedures to facilitate enforcement of immigration laws and expanded excludable classes of immigrants.
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES [asiatic barred zone]
“...persons who are natives of islands not possessed by the United States adjacent to the Continent of Asia . . . The provision next foregoing, however, shall not apply to persons of the following status or occupations: Government officers, ministers or religious teachers, missionaries, lawyers, physicians, chemists, civil engineers, teachers, students, authors, artists, merchants, and travelers for curiosity or pleasure...” [literacy test]
“The following persons shall also be excluded from admission thereto, to wit: All aliens over sixteen years of age, physically capable of reading, who can not read the English language, or some other language or dialect, including Hebrew or Yiddish...” [expanded excludable classes of immigrants]
“That the following classes of aliens shall be excluded from admission into the United States: All idiots, imbeciles, feeble-minded persons, epileptics, insane persons: persons who have had one or more attacks of insanity at any time previously; persons of constitutional psychopathic inferiority; persons with chronic alcoholism; paupers . . . persons afflicted with tuberculosis in any form or with a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease; persons . . . mentally or physically defective . . . persons who have been convicted of or admit having committed a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; polygamists . . . anarchists . . . prostitutes . . . contract laborers . . . persons likely to become a public charge;”
After Chinese and Japanese laborers were barred via the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act and 1907 Gentleman’s Agreement respectively, other immigrants were still sources of cheap labor for capitalist industrialists and plantation owners. South Asian immigrants largely became the new targets of anti-Asian nativist sentiments, eventually leading to the Asiatic Barred Zone (Lee 2015). The act not only expanded restrictions on Asian immigration with the Asiatic Barred Zone but also de facto targeted European immigration for the first time with its literacy test, demonstrating the continued rise of the nativist movement in the United States. The literacy test and exemptions made for immigrants in professional occupations once again demonstrates how immigration restrictions were written on class lines.
The majority of the expanded excludable classes of immigrants were explicitly based in ableism and eugenics. Other excludable classes such as “anarchists” and “persons who are members of or affiliated with any organization entertaining and teaching disbelief in or opposition to organized government” also demonstrate the political nature of immigration exclusion.
8 Immigration Act of 1924
This Act set its quotas to 2 percent of resident populations counted in the 1890 census, capping overall immigration at 150,000 per year. With a few exemptions, such as specialized employment, education, or tourism, it barred altogether “aliens ineligible for citizenship.” Eastern and southern Europeans were most severely affected by reductions in legal immigration. The “national origins” quota system to limit immigration selectively was quantitatively discriminatory and would remain the primary principle determining admissibility to the United States until 1965. In consideration of maintaining good relations with its closest neighbors in the region, immigration within the Western hemisphere remained uncapped.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
[numerical limitations] “The annual quota of any nationality shall be 2 per centum of the number of foreign born individuals of such nationality resident in continental United States as determined by the United States census of 1890, but the minimum quota of any nationality shall be 100.” [deportation] Any alien who at any time after entering the United States is found to have been at the time of entry not entitled under this Act to enter the United States, or to have remained therein for a longer time than permitted under this Act ...shall be taken into custody and deported. [application for immigration visa] “Every immigrant applying for an immigration visa shall make application...The immigrant shall furnish, if available, to the consular officer, with his application, two copies of his ”dossier” and prison record and military record, two certified copies of his birth certificate, and two copies of all other available public records concerning him kept by the Government to which he owes allegiance.”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
It also extended previous exclusion acts targeting Asian immigration -- by barring immigration from “aliens ineligible for citizenships,” this act essentially prohibited all immigration from non-US controlled Asian countries. Additionally, the calculation of quotas based on America’s populations largely benefited British and Western European immigrants (actually increasing visas available to these areas) while limiting Southern and Eastern European immigrants. This act further developed and institutionalized the policing of immigrants by creating the US Border Patrol (which continues to operate today as part of the Department of Homeland Security).
9 TydingsMcDuffie Act 1934
As U.S. nationals from a colony of the United States, Filipinos could not be excluded along with other Asians. To resolve this problem, exacerbated by fervent anti-Filipino campaigns on the west coast, Congress promised eventual independence to the Philippines in 1945. This change in status allowed Congress to impose an immigration quota of 50 persons per year, effectively ending Filipino immigration.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
“AN ACT To provide for the complete independence of the Philippine Islands, to provide for the adoption of a constitution and a form of government for the Philippine Islands, and for other purposes.”
“The Philippine Legislature is hereby authorized to provide for the election of delegates to a constitutional convention... to formulate and draft a constitution for the government of the Commonwealth of the Philippine Islands, subject to the conditions and qualifications prescribed in this Act, which shall exercise jurisdiction over all the territory ceded to the United States by the treaty of peace concluded between the United States and Spain on the 10th day of December 1898...” “...For such purposes the Philippine Islands shall be considered as a separate country and shall have for each fiscal year a quota of fifty. This paragraph shall not apply to a person coming or seeking to come to the Territory of Hawaii who does not apply for and secure an immigration or passport visa, but such immigration shall be determined by the Department of the Interior on the basis of the needs of industries in the Territory of Hawaii. “
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
“The new policy of treating Filipinos as aliens rather than nationals worked in concert with the U.S. government’s new use of repatriation, or removal, of undesirable immigrants in the country, as another method of international immigration control. The Filipino Repatriation Act of July 10, 1935, stated that any Filipino born in the Philippines and living in the United States could apply for the “benefits” of repatriation to the Philippines. The U.S. would pay for all expenses, but there was one catch: any repatriate would be barred from entering the United States ever again” (Lee 2015). What was driving immigration from the Philippines was that the US literally colonized the Philippines after the Spanish-American War. The US “ending” explicit colonial rule in favor of barring Filipinx immigration demonstrates the malleability of imperialism. Although the United States granted the Philippines independence through this act, it maintained imperialist control and economic exploitation over the country, ensuring that it would remain beneficial to American capitalist interests (Chew 2020). Dichotomic relationship in treatment of Philippines/ Filipinx -- colonial domination and control (making people from the Philippines US nationals) over the Philippines paired with anti-Filipinx immigration sentiments.
10 Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965
More than four decades after the passage of the 1924 Reed-Johnson Act, Congress legislated a system of immigration control to replace the discriminatory national origins system. The new system implemented preferences which prioritized family reunification (75 percent), employment (20 percent), and refugee status (5 percent). Spouses, minor children, and parents remained nonquota immigrants. Each country received the same annual cap of 20,000 and for the first time countries in the American hemisphere faced numeric caps on immigration.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
“The immediate relatives specified in this subsection who are otherwise qualified for admission as immigrants shall be admitted as such, without regard to the numerical limitations in this Act…” No person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of his race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence… “(3) Visas shall next be made available...to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions, or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural interests, or welfare of the United States.” “(6) Visas shall next be made available...to qualified immigrants who are capable of performing specified skilled or unskilled labor, not of a temporary or seasonal nature, for which a shortage of employable and willing persons exists in the United States.” “(7) Conditional entries shall next be made available by the Attorney General...to aliens who satisfy an Immigration and Naturalization Service officer at an examination in any non-Communist or non-Communist-dominated country, that because of persecution or fear of persecution on account of race, religion, or political opinion they have fled (I) from any Communist or Communist-dominated country or area, or (II) from any country within the general area of the Middle East”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Supposedly, no person will be discriminated against in obtaining their visas. Since then however, US visa policies have repeatedly been discriminatory, including visa officials basing approvals and rejections off of profiles of race, ethnicity, nationality, and appearance (Shenon 1998) and visa programs that de facto benefited white European immigrants (Gaiba 2016). The Trump administration’s “Muslim Ban” is one of the latest examples. This act the national origins quota with one based upon other factors including “qualifications” of labor -- ability to provide capitalist value. This led to a sharp rise in immigration, and specifically technically skilled/educated immigration, from Asian countries -- one of the big factors in cementing the model minority myth that sees Asians as “good immigrants/minorities” in America. This resulted in the further entrenchment the classed nature of who was allowed/prioritized to immigrate that lasts to this day -- “acceptable” immigrants based on economic qualifications such as education, job training, etc., while “unacceptable” immigrants are seen as unskilled and economically harmful to America. The specification of immigrants in non-Communist/ non-Communist-dominated countries and immigrants who have fled from such countries reflects the Cold War era politics behind the 1965 Immigration Act, as ““While reformers and presidents insisted that a liberal immigration policy was tied to antiCommunism abroad” (Reimers 1985)”.
11 Refugee Act of 1980
This law superseded the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 and raised the annual ceiling for refugees from 17,400 to 50,000, created a process for reviewing and adjusting the refugee ceiling to meet emergencies, and required annual consultation between Congress and the President on refugee admissions. The Act changed the definition of “refugee” to a person with a “well-founded fear of persecution” according to standards established by United Nations conventions and protocols. It also funded a new Office of U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs and an Office of Refugee Resettlement.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
“The Congress declares that it is the historic policy of the United States to respond to the urgent needs of persons subject to persecution in their homelands, including, where appropriate, humanitarian assistance for their care and maintenance in asylum areas, efforts to promote opportunities for resettlement or voluntary repatriation, aid for necessary transportation and processing, admission to this country of refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United States, and transitional assistance to refugees in the United States...”
“The objectives of this Act are to provide a permanent and systematic procedure for the admission to this country of refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United States,” “and to provide comprehensive and uniform provisions for the effective resettlement and absorption of those refugees who are admitted.”
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
The historic policy of the United States is to continue imperialism and colonization in order to maintain global capitalism and white supremacy. The historic policy of the United States is the very persecution that this act says that they are trying to respond to. The historic policy of the United States is to use the guise of humanitarian assistance to further imperialist goals and destabilize decolonial revolutions. “Permanent” procedure that was followed up within two decades with policies, sanctions, and threats that worked to criminalize refugees and then deport them. The Act says this but in actuality, many resettlement programs have failed to meet the needs for refugees’ survivals and wellbeings. Failures in programs to resettle refugees in the United States have resulted in high incarceration rates leading to deportation orders.
12
Executive Order 13769: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States 2017
On January 27, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order that banned travel to the United States for 90 days from seven predominantly Muslim countries–Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen–and suspended the resettlement of all Syrian refugees. On June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 opinion, ultimately allowed a third version of the executive order to go into force, which expanded the list of barred travelers to include nationals from Venezuela (limited to government officials) and North Korea. In 2020, the Trump administration expanded visa restrictions on six more countries–Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania–citing screening and national security concerns in those countries. Nationals of thirteen countries are currently subject to various travel restrictions.
RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, IMPERIALIST POLICIES
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP... find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in section 2 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions. I therefore hereby proclaim the following: Section 1. Policy and Purpose. (a) It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks and other public-safety threats. Screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with visa adjudications and other immigration processes play a critical role in implementing that policy . . . . Sec. 2. Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern. The entry into the United States of nationals of the following countries is hereby suspended and limited, as follows, subject to categorical exceptions and case by-case waivers . . . . [Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia]
THE ACT’S ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
This Executive Order is based in a statute in the aforementioned 1965 Immigration Act that gave presidents the power to block travel from those deemed “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” The same statute would also later be used to justify the Trump administration’s restriction of travel to immigrants affiliated with Communist parties in 2020 (Mozur 2020). All of the countries covered by the travel ban, and particularly the initial seven countries in 2017, are countries that the United States targets with devastating intervention -- for decades, America has subjected these countries to war, military intervention, sanctions, interference, air strikes, etc. The US is literally responsible for millions of deaths in the Middle East (Davies 2018). Yet, the US tries to say that it’s these countries that are threats to the US, and not vice versa. The portrayal of such countries as threats to American national security belies the responsibility of the United States for the violence and destabilization in the Middle East. This demonstrates how America leverages its borders as an extension of its imperialism -- it causes the conditions which drive people to immigrate and/ or become refugees, while denying the victims of its violence at its borders. This Executive Order is a modern example of how supposed issues of “national security” are leveraged by the state in order to pass xenophobic and racist immigration restrictions.
13 excerpts from Takao Ozawa v. US Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant is a person of the Japanese race born in Japan. He applied, on October 16, 1914, to the United States District Court for the Territory of Hawaii to be admitted as a citizen of the United States. His petition was opposed by the United States District Attorney for the District of Hawaii. Including the period of his residence in Hawaii appellant had continuously resided in the United States for 20 years. He was a graduate of the Berkeley, Cal., high school, had been nearly three years a student in the University of California, had educated his children in American schools, his family had attended American churches and he had maintained the use of the English language in his home. That he was well qualified by character and education for citizenship is conceded. The District Court of Hawaii, however, held that, having been born in Japan and being of the Japanese race, he was not eligible to naturalization under section 2169 of the Revised Statutes (Comp. St. § 4358), and denied the petition. Thereupon the appellant brought the cause to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and that court has certified the following questions, upon which it desires to be instructed: ‘1. Is the act of June 29, 1906 (34 Stats. at Large, pt. 1, p. 596), providing ‘for a uniform rule for the naturalization of aliens’ complete in itself, or is it limited by section 2169 of the Revised Statutes of the United States? ‘2. Is one who is of the Japanese race and born in Japan eligible to citizenship under the naturalization laws? ‘3. If said act of June 29, 1906, is limited by section 2169 and naturalization is limited to aliens being free white persons and to aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent, is one of the Japanese race, born in Japan, under any circumstances eligible to naturalization?’ [...] In 1790 the first naturalization act provided that—— ‘Any alien being a free white person * * * may be admitted to become a citizen. * * *’ 1 Stat. 103, c. 3. This was subsequently enlarged to include aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent. These provisions were restated in the Revised Statutes, so that section 2165 included only the procedural portion, while the substantive parts were carried into a separate section (2169) and the words ‘An alien’ substituted for the words ‘Any alien.’ [...] This brings us to inquire whether, under section 2169, the appellant is eligible to naturalization. The language of the naturalization laws from 1790 to 1870 had been uniformly such as to deny the privilege of naturalization to an alien unless he came within the description ‘free white person.’ By section 7 of the act of July 14, 1870 (16 Stat. 254, 256 [Comp. St. § 4358]), the naturalization laws were ‘extended to aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent.’ Section 2169 of the Revised Statutes, as already pointed out, restricts the privilege to the same classes of persons, viz. ‘to aliens [being free white persons, and to aliens] of African nativity and to persons of African descent.’ It is true that in the first edition of the Revised Statutes of 1873 the words in brackets, ‘being free white persons, and to aliens’ were omitted, but this was clearly an error of the compilers and was corrected by the subsequent legislation of 1875 (18 Stat. 316, 318). Is appellant, therefore, a ‘free white person,’ within the meaning of that phrase as found in the statute? On behalf of the appellant it is urged that we should give to this phrase the meaning which it had in the minds of its original framers in 1790 and that it was employed by them for the sole purpose of excluding the black or African race and the Indians then inhabiting this country. It may be true that those two races were alone thought of as being excluded, but to say that they were the only ones within the intent of the statute would be to ignore the affirmative form of the legislation.
The provision is not that Negroes and Indians shall be excluded, but it is, in effect, that only free white persons shall be included. The intention was to confer the privilege of citizenship upon that class of persons whom the fathers knew as white, and to deny it to all who could not be so classified. It is not enough to say that the framers did not have in mind the brown or yellow races of Asia. It is necessary to go farther and be able to say that had these particular races been suggested the language of the act would have been so varied as to include them within its privileges. [...] We have been furnished with elaborate briefs in which the meaning of the words ‘white person’ is discussed with ability and at length, both from the standpoint of judicial decision and from that of the science of ethnology. It does not seem to us necessary, however, to follow counsel in their extensive researches in these fields. It is sufficient to note the fact that these decisions are, in substance, to the effect that the words import a racial and not an individual test, and with this conclusion, fortified as it is by reason and authority, we entirely agree. Manifestly the test afforded by the mere color of the skin of each individual is impracticable, as that differs greatly among persons of the same race, even among AngloSaxons, ranging by imperceptible gradations from the fair blond to the swarthy brunette, the latter being darker than many of the lighter hued persons of the brown or yellow races. Hence to adopt the color test alone would result in a confused overlapping of races and a gradual merging of one into the other, without any practical line of separation.
[...] The determination that the words ‘white person’ are synonymous with the words ‘a person of the Caucasian race’ simplifies the problem, although it does not entirely dispose of it. Controversies have arisen and will no doubt arise again in respect of the proper classification of individuals in border line cases. The effect of the conclusion that the words ‘white person’ means a Caucasian is not to establish a sharp line of demarcation between those who are entitled and those who are not entitled to naturalization, but rather a zone of more or less debatable ground outside of which, upon the one hand, are those clearly eligible, and outside of which, upon the other hand, are those clearly ineligible for citizenship. Individual cases falling within this zone must be determined as they arise from time to time by what this court has called, in another connection (Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97, 104, 24 L. Ed. 616), ‘the gradual process of judicial inclusion and exclusion.’ The appellant, in the case now under consideration, however, is clearly of a race which is not Caucasian and therefore belongs entirely outside the zone on the negative side. A large number of the federal and state courts have so decided and we find no reported case definitely to the contrary. These decisions are sustained by numerous scientific authorities, which we do not deem it necessary to review. We think these decisions are right and so hold. The briefs filed on behalf of appellant refer in complimentary terms to the culture and enlightenment of the Japanese people, and with this estimate we have no reason to disagree; but these are matters which cannot enter into our consideration of the questions here at issue. We have no function in the matter other than to ascertain the will of Congress and declare it. Of course there is not implied—either in the legislation or in our interpretation of it—any suggestion of individual unworthiness or racial inferiority. These considerations are in no manner involved.
14
15
excerpts from US v. Bhagat Singh Thind Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court. This cause is here upon a certificate from the Circuit Court of appeals requesting the instruction of this Court in respect of the following questions: “1 Is a high caste Hindu of full Indian blood, born at Amrit Sar, Punjab, India, a white person within the meaning of section 2169, Revised Statutes? “2 Does the act of February 5, 1917, (39 Stat. L. 875, section 3) disqualify from naturalization as citizens those Hindus, now barred by that act, who had lawfully entered the United States prior to the passage of said act?”.[...] If the applicant is a white person within the meaning of this section he is entitled to naturalization; otherwise not. In Ozawa v. United States, 200 U. S. 178, we had occasion to consider the application of these words to the case of a cultivated Japanese and were constrained to hold that he was not within their meaning. As there pointed out, the provision is not that any particular class of persons shall be excluded, but it is, in effect, that only white persons shall be included within the privilege of the statute. “The intention was to confer the privilege of citizenship upon that class of persons whom the fathers knew as white, and to deny it to all who could not be so classified. It is not enough to say that the framers did not have in mind the brown or yellow races of Asia. It is necessary to go farther and be able to say that had these particular races been suggested the language of the act would have been so varied as to include them within its privileges.” ... Following a long line of decisions of the lower federal courts, we held that the words imported a racial and not an individual test and were meant to indicate only persons of what is popularly known as the Caucasian race. But, as there pointed out, the conclusion that the phrase “white persons” and the word “Caucasian” are synonymous does not end the matter.... In the endeavor to ascertain the meaning of the statute we must not fail to keep in mind that it does not employ the word “Caucasian” but the words “white persons,” and these are words of common speech and not of scientific origin. The word “Caucasian” not only was not employed in the law but was probably wholly unfamiliar to the original framers of the statute in 1790. When we employ it we do so as an aid to the ascertainment of the legislative intent and not as an invariable substitute for the statutory words.[...] They imply, as we have said, a racial test; but the term “race” is one which, for the practical purposes of the statute, must be applied to a group of living persons now possessing in common the requisite characteristics, not to groups of persons who are supposed to be or really are descended from some remote, common ancestor, but who, whether they both resemble him to a greater or less extent, have, at any rate, ceased altogether to resemble one another. It may be true that the blond Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have a common ancestor in the dim reaches of antiquity, but the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences between them today; and it is not impossible, if that common ancestor could be materialized in the flesh, we should discover that he was himself sufficiently differentiated from both
16 The eligibility of this applicant for citizenship is based on the sole fact that he is of high caste Hindu stock, born in Punjab, one of the extreme northwestern districts of India, and classified by certain scientific authorities as of the Caucasian or Aryan race.... The term “Aryan” has to do with linguistic and not at all with physical characteristics, and it would seem reasonably clear that mere resemblance in language, indicating a common linguistic root buried in remotely ancient soil, is altogether inadequate to prove common racial origin. There is, and can be, no assurance that the so-called Aryan language was not spoken by a variety of races living in proximity to one another. Our own history has witnessed the adoption of the English tongue by millions of Negroes, whose descendants can never be classified racially with the descendants of white persons notwithstanding both may speak a common root language. The word “Caucasian” is in scarcely better repute. It is at best a conventional term.... it includes not only the Hindu but some of the Polynesians, (that is the Maori, Tahitians, Samoans, Hawaiians and others), the Hamites of Africa, upon the ground of the Caucasic cast of their features, though in color they range from brown to black. We venture to think that the average well informed white American would learn with some degree of astonishment that the race to which he belongs is made up of such heterogeneous elements.[...] It does not seem necessary to pursue the matter of scientific classification further. We are unable to agree with the District Court, or with other lower federal courts, in the conclusion that a native Hindu is eligible for naturalization under §2169. The words of familiar speech, which were used by the original framers of the law, were intended to include only the type of man whom they knew as white. The immigration of that day was almost exclusively from the British Isles and Northwestern Europe, whence they and their forbears had come. When they extended the privilege of American citizenship to “any alien, being a free white person,” it was these immigrants—bone of their bone and flesh of their flesh—and their kind whom they must have had affirmatively in mind. The succeeding years brought immigrants from Eastern, Southern and Middle Europe, among them the Slavs and the dark-eyed, swarthy people of Alpine and Mediterranean stock, and these were received as unquestionably akin to those already here and readily amalgamated with them. It was the descendants of these, and other immigrants of like origin, who constituted the white population of the country when section 2169, re-enacting the naturalization test of 1790, was adopted, and, there is no reason to doubt, with like intent and meaning. What we now hold is that the words “free white persons” are words of common speech, to be interpreted in accordance with the understanding of the common man, synonymous with the word “Caucasian” only as that word is popularly understood. As so understood and used, whatever may be the speculations of the ethnologist, it does not include the body of people to whom the appellee belongs. It is a matter of familiar observation and knowledge that the physical group characteristics of the Hindus render them readily distinguishable from the various groups of persons in this country commonly recognized as white. The children of English, French, German, Italian, Scandinavian, and other European parentage, quickly merge into the mass of our population and lose the distinctive hallmarks of their European origin. On the other hand, it cannot be doubted that the children born in this country of Hindu parents would retain indefinitely the clear evidence of their ancestry. It is very far from our thought to suggest the slightest question of racial superiority or inferiority. What we suggest is merely racial difference, and it is of such character and extent that the great body of our people instinctively recognize it and reject the thought of assimilation.
immigrants are criminals. immigrants are important to the e political customs are at odds with American values and have 17 States if nothing is done right now. immigrants are taking ou criminals. immigrants are important to the economy. immigra are at odds with American values and have no place here. im done right now. immigrants are taking our jobs. immigrants ar are important to the economy. immigrants carry diseases. i American values and have no place here. immigrants are goi immigrants are taking our jobs. immigrants are reproducing to the economy. immigrants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultu and have no place here. immigrants are going to overrun th taking our jobs. immigrants are reproducing rapidly. immigra immigrants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and political here. immigrants are going to overrun the United States if immigrants are reproducing rapidly. immigrants are crimin carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and political customs a immigrants are going to overrun the United States if nothing i are reproducing rapidly. immigrants are criminals. immigran immigrants’ cultural and political customs are at odds with Am overrun the United States if nothing is done right now. immigr immigrants are criminals. immigrants are important to the e political customs are at odds with American values and have States if nothing is done right now. immigrants are taking ou criminals. immigrants are important to the economy. immigra are at odds with American values and have no place here. im done right now. immigrants are taking our jobs. immigrants ar are important to the economy. immigrants carry diseases. i American values and have no place here. immigrants are goi immigrants are taking our jobs. immigrants are reproducing to the economy. immigrants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultu and have no place here. immigrants are going to overrun th taking our jobs. immigrants are reproducing rapidly. immigra immigrants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and political here. immigrants are going to overrun the United States if immigrants are reproducing rapidly. immigrants are crimin carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and political customs a immigrants are going to overrun the United States if nothing i are reproducing rapidly. immigrants are criminals. immigran immigrants’ cultural and political customs are at odds with Am
economy. immigrants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and e no place here. immigrants are going to overrun the United 18 ur jobs. immigrants are reproducing rapidly. immigrants are ants carry diseases. immigrants’ cultural and political customs mmigrants are going to overrun the United States if nothing is re reproducing rapidly. immigrants are criminals. immigrants immigrants’ cultural and political customs are at odds with ing to overrun the United States if nothing is done right now. rapidly. immigrants are criminals. immigrants are important ural and political customs are at odds with American values he United States ifHistory nothing done right now. immigrants are repeatsis itself because imperialism, colonization, anti-Black racism, transmisogynoir, ants are criminals. immigrants are important to the economy. and all systems of power and oppression that have customs are atadapted oddsand with American and evolved as tactics of values exploitation and have no place this section by comparing nothing is donecounterrevolution. right now. Inimmigrants are taking our jobs. recent headlines and news stories on immigration nals. immigrants are important to the economy. immigrants and immigrants to historical primary documents, are at odds with valuesimmigrant and have weAmerican reveal that for centuries bodies no place here. (bothimmigrants literally, as with diseases and reproduction, is done right now. are taking our jobs. immigrants and metaphorically, as a large body of people nts are important to the economy. immigrants “overrunning” the United States) have provided carry diseases. (and continue provide)here. rhetorical space for merican values and have notoplace immigrants are going to a national discussion of race and nation. These rants are takingtropes ourand jobs. immigrants are reproducing rapidly. rhetorics are not conveniently parallel across time, nor are diseases. they simply racist individuals economy. immigrants carry immigrants’ cultural and that are old-fashioned and behind the times. e no place here. Rather, immigrants are going to overrun the United anti-immigrant rhetoric and discourse ur jobs. immigrants are reproducing are persistent because of the needrapidly. to justify theimmigrants are “defending of the borders”cultural of the American nationants carry diseases. immigrants’ and political customs state, which in turn preserve and perpetuate white mmigrants are going toand overrun the United if nothing is supremacy, settler colonialism. Through States the act creating andimmigrants enforcing immigration and re reproducingofrapidly. are policies criminals. immigrants repeating these rhetorics around immigrations, immigrants’ cultural and political customs are at odds with it legitimizes borders that were arbitrarily and ing to overrun forcefully the United States if settler-colonizers nothing is done right now. drawn by European on Indigenous land. rapidly. immigrants are criminals. immigrants are important ural and political customs are at odds with American values he United States if nothing is done right now. immigrants are ants are criminals. immigrants are important to the economy. customs are at odds with American values and have no place nothing is done right now. immigrants are taking our jobs. nals. immigrants are important to the economy. immigrants are at odds with American values and have no place here. is done right now. immigrants are taking our jobs. immigrants nts are important to the economy. immigrants carry diseases. merican values and have no place here. immigrants are going to
19
immigrants are important to the economy
The acceptance of immigrants into the United States has always been contingent upon the labor value that they can provide under capitalism. From the histories of guestworker programs to the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which replaced the quota system with one characterized by education and technical skill, we can see that the place of immigrants relies on their ability to become an economic asset. Today, even the liberal “support” for undocumented immigrants often falls into narratives that the US needs to accept undocumented immigrants because they’re “good for the economy,” rather than redressing the harm done by American imperialism, military intervention, and economic exploitation that creates the material conditions incentivizing undocumented immigration.
20 This story in a 1915 edition of The Hartford Courant praised the contributions of Italian immigrants.
“A Cautious Reform: The Immigration Act of 1965” in Still the Golden Door by David A. Reimers
“[Guestworkers] represent a relatively new form of labor migrant, one designed to balance employers’ desire for contingent, less expensive, and presumably pliable foreign labor and native populations’ antipathy towards those same workers. Unlike immigrants who stay, settle, and in some countries naturalize, vote, and qualify for social services, guestworkers exist in a no man’s land between nations; they provide labor to their host societies but often fall outside the protections of those societies’ labor laws” (2). No Man’s Land: Jamaican Guestworkers in America and the Global History of Deportable Labor, by Cindy Hahamovitch
“Eradicating discrimiation against Third World countries was not the focal point of those who disapproved of American immgiration policies. Rather, critics urged a number of reforms, several of which would have benefited potential migrants from Third World nations, but the center of their critique was the national origins system embedded in the McCarranWalter Act” (63).
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was passed for the purpose of being able to extract labor value from technically skilled, educated immigrants.
21
Throughout history, the status of the immigrant has been and continues to be constructed by criminalization, policing, incarceration, and deportation. At a discursive level, the fear of the criminal immigrant has long been ingrained in the public consciousness. Yellow Peril imagery prevalent in the 19th and early 20th centuries characterized Asian immigrants as savages who preyed upon white women. Today, similar narratives construct undocumented immigrants as dangerous, immoral, lawbreakers (for example, Donald Trump’s claim that Mexican immigrants are drug dealers, criminals, and rapists). These narratives are justified and perpetuated by law enforcement, who are tasked with detaining, incarcerating, and deporting undocumented immigrants. The earliest concept of the “illegal immigrant” was created by the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, and Chinese immigrants who were now characterized as illegal were hounded by law enforcement officials dubbed “Chinese catchers.” Continuing today, ICE agents today routinely raid communities for undocumented immigrants whom they incarcerate in inhumane concentration camps.
immigrants are criminals
22
Created by the Office for Emergency Management and War Production Board. 1942
Yellow Terror in all His Glory 1899
23
As with the narratives of criminality placed upon immigrants, another narrative based in fear and Othering of immigrants is the attribution of diseases to immigrants. Asian immigrants were greeted by extensive medical inspections upon arrival to Angel Island, which frequently became grounds for exclusion and deportation. The race science employed for such inspections declared that Asians carried serious diseases and parasites that threatened the safety of the United States. Inside the borders of the United States, Immigrants were often portrayed as dirty and diseased. Today, narratives of diseased immigrants persist, particularly to fear monger stereotypes of undocumented immigrants. Donald Trump, for example, claimed that “tremendous infectious disease is pouring across the border.” The current COVID pandemic demonstrates the nature of disease narratives and the tenuous “acceptance” of immigrants in America, as hate crimes and violence directed towards Asian immigrants has surged.
immigrants are carrying diseases
24 Doctors operate on a trachoma patient in the operating room at Ellis Island Hospital, circa 1920.
Public Health Service involvement in and discussion of the inspection abroad suggests that officers considered it a significant means of controlling undesirable immigration in the United States. The federal Quarantine Law of 1893 authorized the United States to station PHS officers in European ports to monitor the prevelence of epidemic diseases and to inspect and pass vessels wishing to embark for US ports. Government officials in Naples, Italy, granted PHS quarantine officers permission to inspect departing immigrants under US immigration law.
“As on Ellis Island, newcomers underwent a line inspection and eye exam to detect trachoma, tuberculosis, syphilis, leprosy, and other diseases that warranted exclusion. Heart disease, hernia, “poor physique,” and other conditions that could leave a person unable to work were also grounds for exclusion. Mainstream science of the day held that Asians carried serious strains of diseases as well as parasites, so they had to go through a blood and stool examination for traces of hookworm, liver flukes, and threadworm, among others.” Judy Yung “Xenophobia Takes Over Angel Island – the Ellis Island of the West”
Amy Fairchild “The Functino of the Medical Inspection” from Science at the Borders
“when alien immigration pours its stream of half a million yearly, as has been frequently done during the last decade, and when that stream is polluted with the moral sewage of the old world, including its poverty, drunkenness, infidelity and disease, it is well to put up the bars and save America, at least until she can purify the atmosphere of contagion which foreign invasion has already brought.”
Frank Beard
25
immigrants are going to overrun the country if the United States doesn’t do something right now !
immigrants are taking our jobs As “support” for immigration often hinges upon economic claims, just as often does opposition to immigration. A dominant narrative is that immigrants (both undocumented and documented immigrants) claim jobs and lower wages that would be otherwise benefit deserving American workers. The “economic anxiety” that fuels the racialized fear of immigrants today echoes the claims to labor by white Americans in the settler-colonial foundations of the United States. As each wave of immigrants arrived in the United States, they received backlash as white Americans faced increased competition for the benefits of access to labor. John Miller, the senator behind the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, explicitly argued that Chinese laborers were a threat to white workers with their “machine-like ways” and “muscles of iron” (Lee 2015). Non-white immigrants were consistently the targets of racial violence, lynching, and discrimination, especially during periods where white EuroAmericans faced economic hardship.
26 “With the onset of hard economic times in the 1870s, European immigrants and Americans began to compete for the jobs traditionally reserved for the Chinese. With economic competition came dislike and even racial suspicion and hatred.” “Immigration to the United States,” 1851-1900, Library of Congress
by The George Dee Magic Washing Machine Company, 1886
by John T. McCutcheon printed in the Chicago Tribune, (February 1921
Printed in the Douglas Daily Dispatch, September 1934
27
Immigrants have long been portrayed as antithetical to the values of the United States, threatening to degrade American culture. Supporters of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act declared that “Oriental civilization” was fundamentally at odds with the United States, and Chinese immigrants as corrupting American values (Lee 2015). Politically, Polish immigrants in the 19th century faced ostracization for their tendency to hold more left-leaning politics than the average American (Zimmer 2010). Opponents to liberal immigration reform in the mid-20th century hinged upon similar arguments, declaring that immigration quotas kept “subversives” out of the United States. Today, alarmist narratives of a cultural “invasion” are oft-directed towards nonwhite immigrants and their descendants, particularly Latinx immigrants. Such immigrants are characterized as unassimilable and anti-American, with “evidence” such as speaking languages other than English and practicing cultural traditions supposedly demonstrating the degradation of “American values” -- so-called values which are themselves founded upon the genocide and erasure of Indigenous peoples by white Euro-American settlers (Chavez 2013).
immigrants’ political and /cultural values are at odds with American values and have no place here.
28 “A Cautious Reform: The Immigration Act of 1965” in Still the Golden Door by David A. Reimers
A 1903 cartoon by Louis Dalrymple in Judge magazine depicts European immigrants as rats. (New York Public Library Digital Collection)
“While reformers and presidents insisted that a liberal immigration policy was tied to anti-Communism abroad, defenders of the act maintained that it kept out subversives, and changing it would be detrimental to American national security” (64).
‘Where The Blame Lies.’ American cartoon by Grant Hamilton, 1891, blaming anarchy, socialism, the Mafia, and kindred evils on unrestricted immigration.
The High Tide of Immigration – A National Menace, published by Judge in 1903. The caption reads: ““Immigration statistics for the past year show that the influx of foreigners was the greatest in our history, and also that the hardworking peasants are now being supplanted by the criminals and outlaws of all Europe.””
citations. Chavez, Leo. 2013. The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens, and the Nation, Second Edition. Stanford University Press. Chew, Amee. 2020. “Stop the $2 Billion Arms Sale to the Philippines.” Common Dreams. Davies, Nicolas. 2018. “How Many Millions Have Been Killed in America’s Post9/11 Wars? Part 3: Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen.” Consortium News. Fairchild, Amy L. 2003. Science at the Borders: Immigrant Medical Inspection and the Shaping of the Modern Industrial Labor Force. Johns Hopkins University Press. Gaiba, Francesca. 2016. “I’m a White Immigrant and I Benefited From a Racist Visa Lottery.” Time Magazine. Hahamovitch, Cindy. 2011. No Man’s Land: Jamaican Guestworkers in America and the GLobal History of Deportable Labor. Princeton University Press. Lee, Erika. 2015. The Making of Asian America: A History. New York: Simon & Schuster. Reimers, David M. 1985. Still the Golden Door. Columbia University Press. Shenon, Philip. 1998. “Judge Denounces U.S. Visa Policies Based on Race or Looks.” New York Times. Zimmer, Kenyon. 2010. “The Whole World is Our Country: Immigration and Anarchism in the United States, 1885-1940.” PhD diss., University of Pittsburgh.