33. Has post 9/11 immigration policy made us safer
The immigration politics of the United States has a long history. The first Act of Naturalization was accepted in 1790 and it confined the naturalization to “good white people” of “good moral character” who had lived for two years in the country and one year after they had kept the current state of stay. In 1795 this periods were increased respectively to five years of living in the country and three years after their notice to apply for citizenship. In 1798 this time limits were increased to fourteen years of stay and five years after the notice.
The Fourteenth Amendment (1) was accepted in 1868 which established that the children born in the United States, except the children of diplomats, receive US citizenship with their birth (jus soli). The phrase: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside” was given an interpretation by the Supreme Court in the case United v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898 (2).
2
Later in 1921 with the Emergency Quota Act (3) passed by the Congress, were established quotas based on the number of each nationality who were not born in the United States but lived there including mexican, chinese, jewish and other emigrants.
Reviewing the immigrant legislation of the United States between 1860’s to 1950’s, we conclude that we may call the United States more as “Land of Exclusion” than “Land of Opportunity”. Besides the restrictions, the immigrants were granted the only possibility to work in the heaviest branches of the labour market.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who lived and governed the United States during the Second World War, was criticized that he did little to save the European Jews from the Holocaust (Book written by David S. Wyman) (5). That did not respond to the reality as the newly uncovered documents disclose that he worked quietly in the 1930s to find protection for European jews. The historian Richard Breitman, co-editor of “The Diaries and Papers of James G. McDonald 1935 – 1945” (2009) wrote that Roosevelt was “a master politician who tried to carry out some humanitarian steps while juggling political and military consideration”(6).
Earlier in the 1860s – 1870s appeared and developed a modern concept, called eugenics, which author Francis Galton believed that the desirable traits could be inherited from generation to generation on biographical basis. The concept was very popular in France, Germany, England and United States but the greatest popularity it reached in the first decades of the 20th century becoming a social movement. This lead to developing many eugenics programs worldwide such as genetic screening and birth control promoting marriage restriction, forced abortion, racial segregation, etc. During the Second World War it was proclaimed as
3
an International crime as a genocide and associated with the Nazi Germany. Today we consider it as a brutal movement which violates the human rights.
Returning to the immigration policy of the United States at that time, we have to discuss the Immigration Act of 1924 (7), well-known as Johnson – Reed Act, which includes the National Origin Act and Asian Exclusion Act. It limited the number of emigrants from any country to 2% of the number of the people from the same country, who already lived in the United States. We cannot consider this act ethical, nevertheless it increased that limit to 3% later, because the law was aimed mainly at further restrictions on the Southern and Eastern Europeans, including jews, who had emigrated to escape persecution in Poland and \Russia, as well as putting under a ban the immigration of Middle Easterns, East Asians and Indians. According to it a literacy test was introduced for persons over 16 years; the tax, paid by the immigrants upon arrival was increased and excluded everyone born in a geographically defined “Asiatic Barred Zone”.
Nowadays, new arrangement of the immigrant regulation regime is discussed, the so called Dream Act , an acronym for Development, Relief and Education for Alien minors. The Bill will offer conditional permanent residency to immigrants of “good moral character” who arrive in the United States in minors, lived in the country for at least five years and prior to the Act is accepted and come into force. Those who complete two years in the military or two years in a four years higher educational institution will obtain a temporary residency for six years. They may qualify for permanent residency if they have “acquired a degree from an institution of higher education in the United States or have completed at least two years in good standing in a program for bachelor’s degree or higher degree in the United States” or “have served in the Armed services for at least two years and if discharged (have) received an honorable discharge”(The Dream Act)(8). The Dream act
4
may be qualified as a modern vision for the country’s future which aims to ensure the American society with intelligent, educated new members.
Along with this romantic picture, the problems with the immigrants stay opened. Many question, connected with healthcare, refugee or political asylum status, etc. try to find solutions. The American society is bothered about questions should Congress supply free healthcare to undocumented immigrants. The humanitarian attitude assumes they should receive free healthcare on the one hand but on the other hand the society does not agree to pay for it, since the money come from the State Budget.
Another, not well accepted, is the question should the United States grant refugee or political asylum status to all those who are at risk in their countries. We have to give positive answer to this question, since the United States are member of the United nations and according to the 1951 refugee Convention, the Protocol of 1967 relating to the status of refugees, together with the resolution 2198 (XXI) (9) adopted by the United nations general Assembly, where the term “refugee” is defined, all member countries must give asylum status to all people who are at risk in their countries with the following from it consequences.
The attitude of the local communities towards the immigrants generally is hostile. They do not accept their culture, way of living and begin to develop hatred. The local people use to blame the immigrants for their failures, job, money, children behavior, etc. Not integrated by the American society, the immigrants live in small communities, speaking their language, practicing their culture which prevents them from accepting the American culture, the American way of life. Very indicative is the case with the Lost boys of Sudan who were brought as refugees to the United States in 2001 due to the war between the North and South of Sudan where hundreds of people were killed, raped, children lost their parents. Despite the efforts of Churches, government, organizations, they could not integrate in the country and started their return after the end of the war.
5
Another indicative of hatred is the murder case in Patchogue, NY where a Ecuadorean immigrant, Marcelo Lucero, was stabbed and left to die from a group of young American boys. The attitude of the Authorities in such cases is also unacceptable. The teens were convicted for gang assault. In response, Lucero’s family filed a lawsuit for outrage the civil rights against the county, their son lived in, charging the police and the public official for failing to prevent the murder. The case is not solved till now.
6
References:
1 - Constitution of the United States: Amendments 11 – 27. National Archives and record Administration.
Archived from the Original on June 11, 2013
2 - United States v. Wong Kim Ark. 169 U.S. 649. 715 (1898)
3 - The Gentlemen Agreement of 1907
4 - Emergency Quota Act of 1921
5 – David S. Wyman, The Aaondonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust”, New York, Pantheon Books, 1984
6 – Breitman, Richard, Barbara McDonald Stewart, Hochberg, Severin ed. “The Diaries and Papers of James
McDonald 1935 - 1945”, Indiana University Press
7 – Immigration Act of 1924 (publ.L68 – 139, 43 Stat. 153)
8 – Dream Act –The Library of the Congress, Tomas, Bill Summary and Status,108th Congress (2003 – 2004)
S 1575, Section 5(d)
9 – The Refugee Convention of 1951 and The Protocol of 1967 relating to the Status of Refugees.
Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.
