All content categorized with: Immigration
Filter
Post List
Vigilante Racism: The De-Americanization of Immigrant America
Sadly, the de-Americanization process is capable of reinventing itself generation after generation. We have seen this exclusionary process aimed at those of Jewish, Asian, Mexican, Haitian, and other descent throughout the nation's history. De-Americanization is not simply xenophobia, because more than fear of foreigners is at work. This is a brand of nativism cloaked in a Euro-centric sense of America that combines hate and racial profiling. Whenever we go through a period of de-Americanization like what is currently happening to South Asians, Arabs, Muslim Americans, and people like Wen Ho Lee-a whole new generation of Americans sees that exclusion and hate is acceptable; that the definition of who is an American can be narrow; that they too have license to profile. Their license is issued when others around them engage in hate and the government chimes in with its own profiling. This is part of the sad process of unconscious and institutionalized racism that haunts our country.The Tension Between the Need and Exploitation of Migrant Workers: Using MSAWPA’s Legislative Intent to Find a Balanced Remedy
This Comment concludes that the recent Maine federal district cases represent an irreconcilable spike in a national and international trend to afford more protection to a vulnerable class whose resources are the object of urgent demand. However, the search for a proper remedial weight in the balance between migrant worker protection and the provision of competitive farm labor is not a new problem.The Alienation of Fathers
By evaluating immigration and custody law from a father's perspective and thereby uncovering and addressing the biases held against men, both fathers and mothers will achieve greater recognition. Beyond revealing gender discrimination, such a study also demonstrates the disparate views still harbored toward unmarried parents. Examining custody and immigration law with an emphasis on these issues will hopefully foster a dialogue that brings the law in line with the reality of today's families and promotes each family member's individual potential.Expert Report of Thomas J. Sugrue
At the end of the twentieth century, the United States is a remarkably diverse society. It grows more diverse by the day, transformed by an enormous influx of immigrants from Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia. In an increasingly global economy, Americans are coming into contact with others of different cultures to an extent seen only in times of world war. Yet amidst this diversity remains great division. When the young black academic W.E.B. DuBois looked out onto America in 1903, he memorably proclaimed that "the problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color line." Over the last one hundred years, that color line has shifted but not disappeared. The brutal regime of Jim Crow and lynching was vanquished by a remarkable grassroots movement for racial equality and civil rights. Overt expressions of racism are less common than they were a half century ago. Many nonwhite Americans, among them African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans, are better off than their forbears. Despite all of the gains of the past century, however, the burden of history still weighs heavily. Color lines still divide and separate Americans. Many Americans have managed diversity by avoiding it-by retreating into separate communities walled off by ignorance and distrust. In American public and private life, there are far too few opportunities to cross racial and ethnic barriers, to understand and appreciate differences, to learn from diversity rather than use it as an excuse for reproach and recrimination.To Yick Wo, Thanks for Nothing!: Citizenship for Filipino Veterans
In this Note, the Author uses science fiction novelist Robert Heinlein's model of citizenship as an analytical framework for examining the historical treatment of Filipino veterans of World War II. The Author Heinlein's conception of citizenship in Starship Troopers was one in which a person can acquire citizenship only through a term of service in the state's armed forces. Similarly, the United States provided immediate eligibility for citizenship to World War II era foreign veterans, but it effectively excluded Filipino veterans from this benefit. The Author examines how the plenary power doctrine in immigration law, has quashed legal challenges by Filipino veterans and created a structural imbalance that not only allows but encourages similar inequities. The Author also notes that while Congress has enacted remedial legislation, this delayed conferral of citizenship without accompanying veteran's benefits is both inadequate and incomplete. Accordingly, the Author suggests that the plenary power doctrine, in the context of the Filipino veterans, must give way to textual reading of the U.S. Constitution which places an express limit of geographic uniformity in the area of naturalization. Drawing from the use of reparations in immigration policy, the Author recommends that further legislative remedies be enacted to ensure that Filipino veterans and their descendants are provided a fair and equitable remedy for their service to the United States.Race Discourse and Proposition 187
Proposition 187 inspired a visceral public discourse. Proponents and opponents of the measure discussed several themes important to contemporary political theory, particularly themes related to sovereignty and civil rights. This Note shows how participants in that debate-including people of color-spoke of "rights" in a way that denied the possibility for undocumented aliens to have rights. When citizens spoke, they did so in a way that implicitly linked rights to citizenship; in other words, they assumed that without citizenship, persons were not entitled to rights or rights-based claims. Ironically, the debate about Proposition 187 pointed to the achievements of a "civil rights" vision, even as that debate reduced undocumented aliens to "nonpersons," without rights and without a legitimate place in society. California citizens talked, instead, about how useless or useful undocumented aliens were and about how society should best manage them as a resource. The debate raised serious questions about the limits of a civil rights discourse, and about its potential to divide people of color against themselves.
