Carl L. Bankston (Editor), Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo (Editor) - Immigration in U.S. History (2 Volume Set) - Salem Press (2006)

Immigration
in
U.S. History
MAGILL’S C H O I C E
Immigration
in
U.S. History
Volume 1
Accent discrimination — Indentured servitude
Edited by
Carl L. Bankston III
Tulane University
Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo
Tulane University
Project Editor
R. Kent Rasmussen
Salem Press, Inc.

Pasadena, California Hackensack, New Jersey
Cover image: The NARA photograph on the outside cover of these volumes shows an unidenti-
fied group of European immigrants at Ellis Island in 1908. The original black-and-white pho-
tograph was tinted by R. Kent Rasmussen. Every effort was made to use authentic colors, but
the actual colors of hair and clothes may have differed.
Frontispiece: Italian immigrants approaching Ellis Island on a ferry in 1905.

(Library of Congress)
Copyright © 2006, by Salem Press, Inc.

All rights in this book are reserved. No part of this work may be used or reproduced
in any manner whatsoever or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and re-
trieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner except in the case
of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information address
the publisher, Salem Press, Inc., P.O. Box 50062, Pasadena, California 91115.
∞ The paper used in these volumes conforms to the American National Standard
for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, Z39.48-1992 (R1997)
Some essays originally appeared in (in descending order of numbers): Racial and
Ethnic Relations in America (1999), Encyclopedia of Family Life (1999), Great Events from
History: North American Series (1997), Great Events from History II: Human Rights (1992),
Great Events: 1900-2001 (2002), Women’s Issues (1997), Magill’s Legal Guide (1999), Ency-
clopedia of the U.S. Supreme Court (2001), Identities and Issues in Literature (1997), Crimi-
nal Justice (2006), American Justice (1996), The Bill of Rights (2002), and Survey of Social
Science: Sociology Series (1994). New material has been added.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Immigration in U.S. history / edited by Carl L. Bankston, III, Danielle Antoinette
Hidalgo.
p. cm. — (Magill’s choice)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN-13: 978-1-58765-266-0 (set : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 1-58765-266-8 (set : alk. paper)
ISBN-13: 978-1-58765-267-7 (v. 1 : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 1-58765-267-6 (v. 1 : alk. paper)
[etc.]
1. United States—Emigration and immigration—History. I. Bankston, Carl L.
(Carl Leon), 1952 - II. Hidalgo, Danielle Antoinette. III. Title. IV. Series.
JV6450.I565 2006
304.8′7303—dc22
2005033560
First Printing
printed in the united states of america
Disclaimer: Some images in the printed version of this book are not available for
inclusion in the eBook.
Contents
Complete List of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Publisher’s Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Contributors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
Accent discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
African immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Afro-Caribbean immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Alien and Sedition Acts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Alien land laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Amerasians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
American Jewish Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Anglo-conformity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Arab American intergroup relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Arab American stereotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Arab immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Asian American education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Asian American Legal Defense Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Asian American literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Asian American stereotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Asian American women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Asian Indian immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Asian Indian immigrants and family customs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Assimilation theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Au pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Bilingual education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Bilingual Education Act of 1968. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Border Patrol, U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Bracero program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
British as dominant group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Burlingame Treaty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Cable Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

California gold rush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Celtic Irish. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Censuses, U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Chicano movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Chinatowns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
v
Immigration in U.S. History
Chinese American Citizens Alliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Chinese detentions in New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Chinese Exclusion Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Chinese exclusion cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Chinese immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Chinese immigrants and family customs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Chinese Six Companies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Citizenship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Clotilde slave ship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Coast Guard, U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Coolies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
Cuban immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Cuban immigrants and African Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Cuban refugee policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Cultural pluralism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Demographics of immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

Deportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Dominican immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Eastern European Jewish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212

English-only and official English movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
Ethnic enclaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Euro-Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
European immigrant literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
European immigrants, 1790-1892 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
European immigrants, 1892-1943 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
Family businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

Farmworkers’ union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Federal riot of 1799 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Filipino immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Filipino immigrants and family customs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
Florida illegal-immigrant suit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
Garment industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270

Generational acculturation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
Gentlemen’s Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
German immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
González rescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Green cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
Gypsy immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
vi
Contents
Haitian boat people. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

Haitian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
Hansen effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
Hawaiian and Pacific islander immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
Head money cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
History of U.S. immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
Hmong immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
Homeland Security Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
Hull-House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
Illegal aliens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334

Immigrant advantage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Immigration Act of 1917 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371
Immigration “crisis”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372
Immigration law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
Indentured servitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387
vii
Complete List of Contents
Volume 1
Accent discrimination, 1 Celtic Irish, 119

African immigrants, 3 Censuses, U.S., 120
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 Chicano movement, 125
Alien and Sedition Acts, 15 Chinatowns, 130
Alien land laws, 19 Chinese American Citizens
Amerasians, 22 Alliance, 133
American Jewish Committee, 26 Chinese detentions in New York,
Anglo-conformity, 27 138
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29 Chinese Exclusion Act, 140
Arab American intergroup Chinese exclusion cases, 144
relations, 33 Chinese immigrants, 146
Arab American stereotypes, 38 Chinese immigrants and
Arab immigrants, 41 California’s gold rush, 151
Ashkenazic and German Jewish Chinese immigrants and family
immigrants, 49 customs, 155
Asian American education, 52 Chinese Six Companies, 160
Asian American Legal Defense Citizenship, 164
Fund, 56 Clotilde slave ship, 168
Asian American literature, 57 Coast Guard, U.S., 172
Asian American stereotypes, 60 Coolies, 174
Asian American women, 63 Cuban immigrants, 176
Asian Indian immigrants, 67 Cuban immigrants and African
Asian Indian immigrants and Americans, 180
family customs, 72 Cuban refugee policy, 184
Asian Pacific American Labor Cultural pluralism, 188
Alliance, 76
Assimilation theories, 79 Demographics of immigration,
Au pairs, 84 190
Deportation, 195
Bilingual education, 85 Discrimination, 201
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90 Dominican immigrants, 207
Border Patrol, U.S., 96
Bracero program, 103 Eastern European Jewish
British as dominant group, 107 immigrants, 212
Burlingame Treaty, 109 English-only and official English
movements, 214
Cable Act, 113 Ethnic enclaves, 219
California gold rush, 115 Euro-Americans, 222
ix
European immigrant literature, Head money cases, 309

224 Helsinki Watch report on U.S.
European immigrants, 1790-1892, refugee policy, 310
235 History of U.S. immigration, 316
European immigrants, 1892-1943, Hmong immigrants, 324
240 Homeland Security Department,
327
Family businesses, 246 Hull-House, 332
Farmworkers’ union, 251
Federal riot of 1799, 257 Illegal aliens, 334
Filipino immigrants, 258 Immigrant advantage, 338
Filipino immigrants and family Immigration Act of 1917, 339
customs, 264 Immigration Act of 1921, 343
Florida illegal-immigrant suit, 267 Immigration Act of 1924, 349
Immigration Act of 1943, 353
Garment industry, 270 Immigration Act of 1990, 356
Generational acculturation, 273 Immigration and Nationality Act of
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276 1952, 358
German and Irish immigration of Immigration and Nationality Act of
the 1840’s, 281 1965, 362
German immigrants, 284 Immigration and Naturalization
González rescue, 290 Service, 366
Green cards, 293 Immigration and Naturalization
Gypsy immigrants, 295 Service v. Chadha, 371
Immigration “crisis,” 372
Haitian boat people, 297 Immigration law, 376
Haitian immigrants, 300 Immigration Reform and Control
Hansen effect, 303 Act of 1986, 383
Hawaiian and Pacific islander Indentured servitude, 387
immigrants, 304
Volume 2
Indigenous superordination, 391 Jamaican immigrants, 415

Iranian immigrants, 392 Jamestown colony, 419
Irish immigrants, 395 Japanese American Citizens
Irish immigrants and African League, 424
Americans, 400 Japanese American internment,
Irish immigrants and 427
discrimination, 402 Japanese immigrants, 431
Irish stereotypes, 403 Japanese Peruvians, 437
Israeli immigrants, 405 Japanese segregation in California
Italian immigrants, 409 schools, 438
x
Jewish immigrants, 443 Operation Wetback, 572

Jewish settlement of New York, 449 Ozawa v. United States, 576
Jews and Arab Americans, 454
Justice and immigration, 458 Page law, 579
Palmer raids, 584
Know-Nothing Party, 465 Picture brides, 589
Korean immigrants, 466 Plyler v. Doe, 590
Korean immigrants and African Polish immigrants, 594
Americans, 469 Proposition 187, 598
Korean immigrants and family Proposition 227, 600
customs, 473 Push and pull factors, 604
Ku Klux Klan, 477
Racial and ethnic demographic
Latinos, 481 trends, 606
Latinos and employment, 488 Refugee fatigue, 612
Latinos and family customs, 494 Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 614
Lau v. Nichols, 499 Refugees and racial/ethnic
League of United Latin American relations, 618
Citizens, 503 Russian immigrants, 622
Literature, 507
Little Havana, 512 Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 626
Little Italies, 514 Santería, 629
Little Tokyos, 516 Scandinavian immigrants, 630
Scotch-Irish immigrants, 635
Machine politics, 518 Sephardic Jews, 636
Mail-order brides, 521 September 11 terrorist attacks, 637
Mariel boatlift, 524 Settlement house movement, 643
Melting pot, 529 Sikh immigrants, 647
Mexican American Legal Defense Southeast Asian immigrants, 649
and Education Fund, 531 Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653
Mexican deportations during the
Depression, 533 Taiwanese immigrants, 655
Middle Eastern immigrant families, Thai garment worker enslavement,
538 657
Migrant superordination, 542 Tibetan immigrants, 659
Migration, 542 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire,
Model minorities, 549 661
Mongrelization, 554 Twice migrants, 664
Muslims, 555
Undocumented workers, 665
Nativism, 558 Universal Negro Improvement
Naturalization, 562 Association, 667
Naturalization Act of 1790, 569
Nguyen v. Immigration and Vietnamese immigrants, 670
Naturalization Service, 571 Visas, 676
xi
War brides, 681 Appendices

War Brides Act, 685 Bibliography, 715
West Indian immigrants, 689 Time Line of U.S. Immigration
White ethnics, 693 History, 723
Women immigrants, 694
Wong Kim Ark case, 699 Indexes
Category Index, 737
Xenophobia, 702 Index of Court Cases, 747
Index of Laws and Treaties, 749
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Index of Personages, 753
Subject Index, 759
Zadvydas v. Davis, 711
xii
Publisher’s Note
In 1958, while campaigning in Congress for passage of amendments to the
Refugee Relief Act, Senator John F. Kennedy published a little book titled A
Nation of Immigrants. His immediate purpose was to call attention to the enor-
mous contributions made to the United States by immigrants and thereby
rally public support behind liberalization of the nation’s immigration laws—
a task in which he succeeded. At the same time, his book helped to fix in the
public mind the fact that the United States was, and always had been, a nation
of immigrants. During Kennedy’s run for the presidency in 1960, much was
made of his Irish ancestry and the fact that the great-grandson of humble
Irish immigrants could be elected president of the United States. In 2003,
more than a generation later, the public reacted with equal wonderment
when Arnold Schwarzenegger—a first-generation Austrian immigrant—was
elected governor of California. Schwarzenegger was not the first immigrant
to be elected governor of an American state, but his elevation to that office
seemed all the more remarkable because California, the nation’s largest
state by population, would rank as the world’s seventh-largest economy,
were it an independent nation. Indeed, its economy would dwarf that of
Schwarzenegger’s Austrian homeland.
Of the 281,421,056 residents of the nation counted by the U.S. Census in
2000, nearly 99 percent traced their ancestry to immigrants who arrived in
North America within the previous four centuries. Moreover, even Native
Americans—who make up the remainder—can trace their ancestry to immi-
grants who came thousands of years earlier. The United States is, indeed, a
nation of immigrants.
Of the many themes that dominate U.S. history, immigration is one of the
most constant and most pervasive. Since the first European and African im-
migrants began arriving in North America during the early seventeenth cen-
tury, immigrants have steadily poured into what is now the United States.
During the early twenty-first century, that flow has continued unabated—the
major difference being that most immigrants now come from Latin Amer-
ica—especially Mexico and Central America—and Asia. Meanwhile, immi-
gration remains as controversial a public issue as it has ever been.
Because the United States is a nation of immigrants, it is obvious that most
of the contributions to the building of the country have been made by immi-
grants and their descendants. Nevertheless, immigration has long been a sub-
ject of debate—and now more than ever, as Americans are increasingly feel-
ing their security threatened by the constant flow of foreigners into the
country.
Subject Matter The two volumes of Immigration in U.S. History examine

the many issues surrounding immigration—from the earliest settlement of
xiii
British North America in the seventeenth century through the immediate af-
termath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks of the twenty-first cen-
tury. The set’s 193 essays explore immigration from a wide variety of perspec-
tives, such as border control and law enforcement (20+ articles), court cases
(9), demographics (47), discrimination (29), economic and labor issues
(25), events (32), family issues (22), government and politics (13), illegal im-
migration (17), language and education (15), laws and treaties (25), litera-
ture (3), nativism and racism (24), refugees (22), religion (21), sociological
theories (14), and stereotypes (10). (Note that some essays are counted un-
der more than one category here and below.)
Immigration in U.S. History places special emphasis on the many ethnic
communities that have provided American immigrants. For example, readers
will find 17 articles treating African Americans; 56 articles about Asian immi-
grants, including articles specifically on Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Japanese,
Korean, Pacific islander, South Asian, Southeast Asian, Tibetan, and Viet-
namese immigrants; 25 articles on Latino and West Indian immigrants, in-
cluding articles specifically on Cubans, Dominicans, Haitians, Jamaicans, and
Mexicans; 10 articles on Middle Eastern immigrants, including articles spe-
cifically on Arabs, Iranians, and Israelis; 37 articles on European immigrants,
including articles on German, Irish, Italian, Jewish, Polish, Russian, and Scan-
dinavian immigrants. Most of these articles are accompanied by graphs sum-
marizing immigration statistics into the twenty-first century.
Immigration in U.S. History answers such questions as

• When did members of individual ethnic groups come to the United
States?
• From what parts of the world have most immigrants come?
• Where have different immigrant groups settled in the United States?
• What contributions have immigrants made to the United States?
• How long has illegal immigration been a problem?
• How have U.S. immigration laws changed over time?
• How has U.S. immigration policy been influenced by events in other
parts of the world?
• Which groups have been victims of discriminatory immigration laws?
• What is a “model minority”?
• What are “push and pull” factors?
• What are “mail-order brides” and “picture brides”?
• What is a green card?
• What do immigration lawyers do?
• How did Chinatowns get started?
• Why have there been conflicts among different immigrant groups?
xiv
Publisher’s Note
• What has been the Supreme Court’s role in American immigration law?
• Which immigrants were the first victims of segregation laws?
• What are the origins of ethnic stereotypes?
• How have immigrants organized to protect their rights and interests?
• What role have immigrants played in U.S. labor history?
• Did all African immigrants to North America come as slaves?
• What has been the impact of the September 11 terrorist attacks on U.S.
immigration policy and border control?
• What was the “yellow peril”?
• What was the bracero program?
• What was American nativism?
• What was the role of immigrants in the political “machines” of big cities?
• Who are the “boat people”?
• How have bilingual education programs affected immigrants?
• What is “generational acculturation”?
• Is there a specifically immigrant literature?
• What state and federal agencies are responsible for enforcing immigra-
tion laws?
Using This Set Each of the alphabetically arranged articles in Immigration

in U.S. History opens with the type of ready-reference top matter for which
Salem Press’s reference works are well known. The first entry following most
titles is a brief passage that defines or identifies the article’s subject. Articles
on such subjects as events, court cases, organizations, and laws have addi-
tional entries that provide dates and places, as relevant. The next item in ev-
ery article is a brief italicized statement summarizing its subject’s signifi-
cance. Readers can thus see the most essential information about every topic
at a glance.
Boldface subheads help guide readers through longer articles, and all arti-
cles are followed by up-to-date Further Reading notes. Additional bibliographi-
cal help can be found in the general bibliography at the end of volume 2.
Immigration provides a rich subject for illustration, and these volumes
contain more than 150 photographs. Many of the photographs offer poi-
gnant images of immigrants arriving in the New World. Many articles are also
illustrated with statistical tables and graphs that provide immigration figures
up to the year 2003. Some graphs include boxed notes on historical events de-
signed to help readers understand why immigration rates have risen and
fallen. The Time Line at the end of volume 2 should also help readers to put
events in a broader historical perspective.
Immigration in U.S. History offers several features to help readers find the
information they need. The first and most obvious feature is the alphabetical
xv
arrangement of the essays, whose titles are worded to make finding topics as
straightforward as possible. Readers may either go directly to the articles they
seek or look for them in the complete list of contents that can found at the
front of each volume. Readers who cannot find what they need in the article
titles will find substantial additional help in the set’s detailed indexes of court
cases, laws and treaties, personages, and general subjects at the end of vol-
ume 2. Volume 2 also has a Categorized List of Topics that should help read-
ers who are uncertain under what headings they should look. Finally, every
article is followed by a list of cross-references to other articles on closely re-
lated subjects. Readers are encouraged to follow the paths that these cross-
references provide.
Acknowledgments All but two of the 193 articles in this set are taken from
13 different Salem Publications: Racial and Ethnic Relations in America (121 ar-
ticles), Encyclopedia of Family Life (13), Great Events from History: North American
Series (12), Great Events from History II: Human Rights (8) Great Events: 1900-
2001 (8), Women’s Issues (6), Magill’s Legal Guide (6), Encyclopedia of the U.S. Su-
preme Court (4), Identities and Issues in Literature (4), Criminal Justice (3), Ameri-
can Justice (3), The Bill of Rights (2), and Survey of Social Science: Sociology Series
(1). These articles and their Further Reading notes have all been updated, as
necessary. Two articles are entirely new (“African immigrants” and “Septem-
ber 11 terrorist attacks”).
The editors of Salem Press would again like to thank the scholars who con-
tributed the essays for making this reference work possible. We also espe-
cially wish to thank the project’s editors, Professor Carl L. Bankston III and
Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo of Tulane University’s Department of Sociology.
xvi
Contributors
Nobuko Adachi Arthur Blaser
Illinois State University Chapman University
McCrea Adams Steve D. Boilard

Independent Scholar Independent Scholar
Carl Allsup Aubrey W. Bonnett

University of Wisconsin at Platteville State University of New York,
Old Westbury
James A. Baer
Northern Virginia Community Denise Paquette Boots
College University of South Florida at Tampa
Barbara Bair Anthony D. Branch

Independent Scholar Golden Gate University
Carl L. Bankston III Michael Broadway

Tulane University Independent Scholar
Rosann Bar Mary Louise Buley-Meissner

Caldwell College University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee
Graciela Bardallo-Vivero Michael H. Burchett

Berkeley College Limestone College
Alvin K. Benson William H. Burnside

Utah Valley State College Lenoir-Rhyne College
Milton Berman Edmund J. Campion

University of Rochester University of Tennessee
Tej K. Bhatia Brenda E. Reinertsen Caranicas

Syracuse University Fort Berthold Community College
Warren M. Billings José A. Carmona

Louisiana State University at Daytona Beach Community College
New Orleans
Peter E. Carr
Cynthia A. Bily Caribbean Historical and Genealogical
Adrian College Journal
xvii
Jack Carter Christopher H. Efird

University of New Orleans Independent Scholar
Balance Chow Sharon Elise

San Jose State University California State University at
San Marcos
John G. Clark
University of Kansas James V. Fenelon
John Carroll University
Lawrence I. Clark
Independent Scholar Celestino Fernández
University of Arizona
Richard H. Collin
Louisiana State University at John W. Fiero
New Orleans University of Southwestern Louisiana
Stephen Cresswell R. M. Frumkin

West Virginia Wesleyan College Center for Democratic Values
Norma Crews C. George Fry

Independent Scholar Lutheran College of Health Professions
Edward R. Crowther Gloria Fulton

Adams State College Humboldt State University
Rochelle L. Dalla John C. Gardner

University of Nebraska Louisiana State University at
Baton Rouge
Richard V. Damms
Mississippi State University Louis Gesualdi
St. John’s University
Mary Yu Danico
California State Polytechnic University K. Fred Gillum
at Pomona Colby College
Judith Boyce DeMark Robert F. Gorman

Northern Michigan University Southwest Texas State University
Ashley W. Doane, Jr. Lewis L. Gould

University of Hartford University of Texas at Austin
Joyce Duncan Christopher Guillebeau

East Tennessee State University University of Memphis
xviii
Contributors
Michael Haas Robert Jacobs

University of Hawaii at Manoa Central Washington University
Peter J. Haas Duncan R. Jamieson

Vanderbilt University Ashland University
Marian Wynne Haber Kristine Kleptach Jamieson

Texas Wesleyan University Ashland University
Irwin Halfond Kathleen Odell Korgen

McKendree College William Patterson University
Susan E. Hamilton Melvin Kulbicki

Independent Scholar York College of Pennsylvania
Sheldon Hanft M. Bahati Kuumba

Appalachina State University Buffalo State College
Keith Harper P. R. Lannert

Mississippi College Independent Scholar
Peter B. Heller Douglas Edward LaPrade

Manhattan College University of Texas—Pan American
Arthur W. Helweg Gregory A. Levitt

Western Michigan University University of New Orleans
Diane Andrews Henningfeld Thomas Tandy Lewis

Adrian College Anoka-Ramsey Community College
Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo Paul Madden

Tulane University Hardin-Simmons University
Keith Orlando Hilton Paul D. Mageli

University of the Pacific Independent Scholar
Ronald W. Howard Martin J. Manning

Mississippi College United States Department of State
John Quinn Imholte Cecilia G. Manrique

University of Minnesota at Morris University of Wisconsin at La Crosse
W. Turrentine Jackson Carl Henry Marcoux

University of California at Davis University of California at Riverside
xix
Chogollah Maroufi R. Kent Rasmussen

California State University at Independent Scholar
Los Angeles
William L. Reinshagen
Rubén O. Martinez Independent Scholar
University of Colorado
Martha E. Rhynes
Hisako Matsuo Independent Scholar
Southern Illinois University at
Carbondale Silke Roth
University of Connecticut
Daniel J. Meissner
University of Wisconsin at Madison Joseph R. Rudolph, Jr.
Towson University
Randall L. Milstein
Lansing Community College Irene Struthers Rush
Independent Scholar
Christina J. Moose
Independent Scholar Wendy Sacket
Independent Scholar
Amy J. Orr
Linfield College Michael A. Scaperlanda
University of Oklahoma
Maria A. Pacino
Azusa Pacific University Helmut J. Schmeller
Fort Hays State University
Gowri Parameswaran
Southwest Missouri State University Kathleen Schongar
The May School
Pedro R. Payne
University of California at Stephen Schwartz
Riverside Buffalo State College
David Peck Larry Schweikart

California State University at University of Dayton
Long Beach
R. Baird Shuman
Louis G. Perez University of Illinois at Urbana-
Independent Scholar Champaign
Wayne J. Pitts Donald C. Simmons, Jr.

University of Memphis Mississippi Humanities Council
Marjorie J. Podolsky Celia Stall-Meadows

Penn State University at Erie Northeastern State University
xx
Contributors
James Stanlaw Thomas J. Edward Walker

Illinois State University Pennsylvania College of Technology
Francis C. Staskon Annita Marie Ward

Independent Scholar Salem-Teikyo University
Susan A. Stussy Major L. Wilson

Neosho County Community College Memphis State University
Robert D. Talbott Richard L. Wilson

University of Northern Iowa University of Tennessee, Chattanooga
Nancy Conn Terjesen Gene Redding Wynne, Jr.

Kent State University Tri-County Technical College
Leslie V. Tischauser George Yancey

Prairie State College University of Wisconsin at Whitewater
Frank Towers Philip Q. Yang

Clarion University California Polytechnic State University
at San Luis Obispo
Paul B. Trescott
Southern Illinois University Cynthia Gwynne Yaudes
Indiana University
Robert D. Ubriaco, Jr.
Spelman College Clifton K. Yearley
State University of New York, Buffalo
Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur
Eastern Michigan University Paul J. Zbiek
King’s College
Theodore M. Vestal
Oklahoma State University
xxi
Immigration
in
U.S. History
Immigration
in
U.S. History
MAGILL’S C H O I C E
Immigration
in
U.S. History
Volume 2
Indigenous superordination — Zadvydas v. Davis
Appendices
Indexes
Edited by
Tulane University
Tulane University
Project Editor
R. Kent Rasmussen
Salem Press, Inc.

Pasadena, California Hackensack, New Jersey
Cover image: The NARA photograph on the outside cover of these volumes shows an unidenti-
fied group of European immigrants at Ellis Island in 1908. The original black-and-white pho-
tograph was tinted by R. Kent Rasmussen. Every effort was made to use authentic colors, but
the actual colors of hair and clothes may have differed.
Frontispiece: From 1892 through 1954, Ellis Island served as the primary reception center for immigrants
reaching the United States from across the Atlantic Ocean. The ornate reception hall is now maintained
as a public museum that visitors may tour on their way to the nearby Statue of Liberty.
Copyright © 2006, by Salem Press, Inc.

All rights in this book are reserved. No part of this work may be used or reproduced
in any manner whatsoever or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and re-
trieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner except in the case
of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information address
the publisher, Salem Press, Inc., P.O. Box 50062, Pasadena, California 91115.
∞ The paper used in these volumes conforms to the American National Standard
for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, Z39.48-1992 (R1997)
Some essays originally appeared in (in descending order of numbers): Racial and
Ethnic Relations in America (1999), Encyclopedia of Family Life (1999), Great Events from
History: North American Series (1997), Great Events from History II: Human Rights (1992),
Great Events: 1900-2001 (2002), Women’s Issues (1997), Magill’s Legal Guide (1999), Ency-
clopedia of the U.S. Supreme Court (2001), Identities and Issues in Literature (1997), Crimi-
nal Justice (2006), American Justice (1996), The Bill of Rights (2002), and Survey of Social
Science: Sociology Series (1994). New material has been added.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Immigration in U.S. history / edited by Carl L. Bankston, III, Danielle Antoinette
Hidalgo.
p. cm. — (Magill’s choice)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN-13: 978-1-58765-266-0 (set : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 1-58765-266-8 (set : alk. paper)
ISBN-13: 978-1-58765-268-4 (v. 2 : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 1-58765-268-4 (v. 2 : alk. paper)
[etc.]
1. United States—Emigration and immigration—History. I. Bankston, Carl L.
(Carl Leon), 1952 - II. Hidalgo, Danielle Antoinette. III. Title. IV. Series.
JV6450.I565 2006
304.8′7303—dc22
2005033560
First Printing
printed in the united states of america

Contents
Complete List of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxiii
Indigenous superordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

Iranian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
Irish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395
Irish immigrants and African Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
Irish immigrants and discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
Irish stereotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
Israeli immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
Italian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Jamaican immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Jamestown colony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Japanese American Citizens League . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Japanese American internment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
Japanese immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
Japanese Peruvians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437
Japanese segregation in California schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438
Jewish immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
Jewish settlement of New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
Jews and Arab Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
Justice and immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
Know-Nothing Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465

Korean immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466
Korean immigrants and African Americans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469
Korean immigrants and family customs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
Ku Klux Klan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477
Latinos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
Latinos and employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
Latinos and family customs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494
Lau v. Nichols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 499
League of United Latin American Citizens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507
Little Havana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512
Little Italies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
Little Tokyos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516
Machine politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 518

Mail-order brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
xxix
Mariel boatlift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524

Melting pot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund . . . . . . . . . 531
Mexican deportations during the Depression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533
Middle Eastern immigrant families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538
Migrant superordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542
Migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542
Model minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 549
Mongrelization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554
Muslims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555
Nativism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
Naturalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562
Naturalization Act of 1790 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569
Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
Operation Wetback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 572

Ozawa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 576
Page law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579

Palmer raids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584
Picture brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 589
Plyler v. Doe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 590
Polish immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594
Proposition 187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598
Proposition 227 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600
Push and pull factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 604
Racial and ethnic demographic trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 606

Refugee fatigue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
Refugee Relief Act of 1953 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614
Refugees and racial/ethnic relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618
Russian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 622
Sacco and Vanzetti trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 626

Santería . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629
Scandinavian immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 630
Scotch-Irish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 635
Sephardic Jews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636
September 11 terrorist attacks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 637
Settlement house movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643
Sikh immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647
Southeast Asian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649
Soviet Jewish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653
xxx
Contents
Taiwanese immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 655

Thai garment worker enslavement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657
Tibetan immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659
Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661
Twice migrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664
Undocumented workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

Universal Negro Improvement Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667
Vietnamese immigrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670

Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 676
War brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681

War Brides Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685
West Indian immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 689
White ethnics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693
Women immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
Wong Kim Ark case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699
Xenophobia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 702
“Yellow peril” campaign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 707
Zadvydas v. Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711
Appendices
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715
Time Line of U.S. Immigration History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723
Indexes
Category Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 737
Index of Court Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 747
Index of Laws and Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 749
Index of Personages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 753
Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 759
xxxi
Volume 1
Accent discrimination, 1 Celtic Irish, 119

African immigrants, 3 Censuses, U.S., 120
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 Chicano movement, 125
Alien and Sedition Acts, 15 Chinatowns, 130
Alien land laws, 19 Chinese American Citizens
Amerasians, 22 Alliance, 133
American Jewish Committee, 26 Chinese detentions in New York,
Anglo-conformity, 27 138
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29 Chinese Exclusion Act, 140
Arab American intergroup Chinese exclusion cases, 144
relations, 33 Chinese immigrants, 146
Arab American stereotypes, 38 Chinese immigrants and
Arab immigrants, 41 California’s gold rush, 151
Ashkenazic and German Jewish Chinese immigrants and family
immigrants, 49 customs, 155
Asian American education, 52 Chinese Six Companies, 160
Asian American Legal Defense Citizenship, 164
Fund, 56 Clotilde slave ship, 168
Asian American literature, 57 Coast Guard, U.S., 172
Asian American stereotypes, 60 Coolies, 174
Asian American women, 63 Cuban immigrants, 176
Asian Indian immigrants, 67 Cuban immigrants and African
Asian Indian immigrants and Americans, 180
family customs, 72 Cuban refugee policy, 184
Asian Pacific American Labor Cultural pluralism, 188
Alliance, 76
Assimilation theories, 79 Demographics of immigration,
Au pairs, 84 190
Deportation, 195
Bilingual education, 85 Discrimination, 201
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90 Dominican immigrants, 207
Border Patrol, U.S., 96
Bracero program, 103 Eastern European Jewish
British as dominant group, 107 immigrants, 212
Burlingame Treaty, 109 English-only and official English
movements, 214
Cable Act, 113 Ethnic enclaves, 219
California gold rush, 115 Euro-Americans, 222
xxxiii
European immigrant literature, Head money cases, 309

224 Helsinki Watch report on U.S.
European immigrants, 1790-1892, refugee policy, 310
235 History of U.S. immigration, 316
European immigrants, 1892-1943, Hmong immigrants, 324
240 Homeland Security Department,
327
Family businesses, 246 Hull-House, 332
Federal riot of 1799, 257 Illegal aliens, 334
Filipino immigrants, 258 Immigrant advantage, 338
Filipino immigrants and family Immigration Act of 1917, 339
customs, 264 Immigration Act of 1921, 343
Florida illegal-immigrant suit, 267 Immigration Act of 1924, 349
Garment industry, 270 Immigration Act of 1990, 356
Generational acculturation, 273 Immigration and Nationality Act of
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276 1952, 358
German and Irish immigration of Immigration and Nationality Act of
the 1840’s, 281 1965, 362
German immigrants, 284 Immigration and Naturalization
González rescue, 290 Service, 366
Green cards, 293 Immigration and Naturalization
Gypsy immigrants, 295 Service v. Chadha, 371
Immigration “crisis,” 372
Haitian boat people, 297 Immigration law, 376
Haitian immigrants, 300 Immigration Reform and Control
Hansen effect, 303 Act of 1986, 383
Hawaiian and Pacific islander Indentured servitude, 387
immigrants, 304
Volume 2
Indigenous superordination, 391 Jamaican immigrants, 415

Iranian immigrants, 392 Jamestown colony, 419
Irish immigrants, 395 Japanese American Citizens
Irish immigrants and African League, 424
Americans, 400 Japanese American internment,
Irish immigrants and 427
discrimination, 402 Japanese immigrants, 431
Irish stereotypes, 403 Japanese Peruvians, 437
Israeli immigrants, 405 Japanese segregation in California
Italian immigrants, 409 schools, 438
xxxiv
Jewish immigrants, 443 Operation Wetback, 572

Jewish settlement of New York, 449 Ozawa v. United States, 576
Jews and Arab Americans, 454
Justice and immigration, 458 Page law, 579
Palmer raids, 584
Know-Nothing Party, 465 Picture brides, 589
Korean immigrants, 466 Plyler v. Doe, 590
Korean immigrants and African Polish immigrants, 594
Americans, 469 Proposition 187, 598
Korean immigrants and family Proposition 227, 600
customs, 473 Push and pull factors, 604
Ku Klux Klan, 477
Racial and ethnic demographic
Latinos, 481 trends, 606
Latinos and employment, 488 Refugee fatigue, 612
Latinos and family customs, 494 Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 614
Lau v. Nichols, 499 Refugees and racial/ethnic
League of United Latin American relations, 618
Citizens, 503 Russian immigrants, 622
Literature, 507
Little Havana, 512 Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 626
Little Italies, 514 Santería, 629
Little Tokyos, 516 Scandinavian immigrants, 630
Scotch-Irish immigrants, 635
Machine politics, 518 Sephardic Jews, 636
Mail-order brides, 521 September 11 terrorist attacks, 637
Mariel boatlift, 524 Settlement house movement, 643
Melting pot, 529 Sikh immigrants, 647
Mexican American Legal Defense Southeast Asian immigrants, 649
and Education Fund, 531 Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653
Mexican deportations during the
Depression, 533 Taiwanese immigrants, 655
Middle Eastern immigrant families, Thai garment worker enslavement,
538 657
Migrant superordination, 542 Tibetan immigrants, 659
Migration, 542 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire,
Model minorities, 549 661
Mongrelization, 554 Twice migrants, 664
Muslims, 555
Undocumented workers, 665
Nativism, 558 Universal Negro Improvement
Naturalization, 562 Association, 667
Naturalization Act of 1790, 569
Nguyen v. Immigration and Vietnamese immigrants, 670
Naturalization Service, 571 Visas, 676
xxxv
War brides, 681 Appendices

War Brides Act, 685 Bibliography, 715
West Indian immigrants, 689 Time Line of U.S. Immigration
White ethnics, 693 History, 723
Women immigrants, 694
Wong Kim Ark case, 699 Indexes
Category Index, 737
Xenophobia, 702 Index of Court Cases, 747
Index of Laws and Treaties, 749
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Index of Personages, 753
Subject Index, 759
Zadvydas v. Davis, 711
xxxvi
Immigration
in
U.S. History
Accent discrimination
Definition: Employment discrimination based on the manner in which em-
ployees or prospective employees speak English
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Discrimination; Education;

Language; Sociological theories
Significance: Under U.S. law, employers can discriminate against applicants

for employment whom they believe to have accents that might impede
their normal business activities. Immigrants, whose primary language is
not English, therefore, may have to shed their accents to qualify for jobs
that involve speaking with the general public.
A standard American English accent is commonly heard in schools and spo-

ken on radio and television, but there are regional variations, especially in
Hawaii, New England, and the southern states. Immigrants who learn English
tend to speak the new language in accordance with the pronunciation and in-
tonation patterns of their native tongues, which means that those unfamiliar
with their accents may not understand them completely and may ask these
immigrants to repeat what they are saying. At issue, therefore, is whether an
employer can reject someone with an unfamiliar accent without discriminat-
ing against that person on the basis of ethnic group membership.
The Nature of Accents Vocal muscles develop so early in life that it is dif-
ficult for an adult native speaker of one language to learn a second language
without carrying forward the accents of the primary language. In the United
States, composed as it is of immigrants and their descendants, English is
spoken with many accents. Some schools teach adult immigrants to speak
without a noticeable accent, but these classes are expensive and not always ac-
cessible to newcomers, whose time is usually preoccupied with material ad-
justments to life in a new country.
The United States does not have an official standard of speech, although
the informal standard is the American English accent spoken by newscasters
at the national level. Accent is the result of speech patterns that differ from
region to region or country to country. For example, Cuban speakers of Span-
ish speak more quickly than do Mexican speakers of Spanish. Variations also
exist within countries. Because one characteristic of an ethnic group in the
United States is the manner in which its members pronounce English, ethnic
group membership is often identified by or associated with accent. It is this
connection that makes accent a key issue of racial and ethnic relations.
Antidiscrimination Legislation and Litigation In the Civil Rights Act

of 1964, Congress banned discrimination on the basis of a person’s color, eth-
1
nicity, or race in education, employment, government services, public ac-

commodations, public facilities, and voting. The law regarding employment
discrimination prohibits not only obvious discrimination, such as signs that
say “Blacks Need Not Apply,” but also the use of neutral-sounding job qualifi-
cations that systematically place minorities or women at a disadvantage unless
these qualifications are vital for the performance of the job. To refuse to hire
a member of a minority group on the pretext that the person’s accent is too
strong, therefore, might violate the law unless the lack of a noticeable accent
can be demonstrated to be necessary for the performance of the job.
In Carino v. University of Oklahoma Board of Regents (1984), the federal ap-
peals court ruled that Donaciano Carino, a dental laboratory supervisor,
could not be terminated from his position because of his Filipino accent as
his job did not involve communication with the general public.
In 1982, Manuel Fragante, a Filipino with a noticeable accent, applied for
the position of applications intake clerk in the motor vehicle licensing divi-
sion of the city and county of Honolulu. The hiring officer turned him down,
claiming that Fragante’s accent would make communication difficult; Fra-
gante’s lawyer argued that his client’s accent was fully understandable and
therefore was a mere pretext for a Japanese supervisor to discriminate against
a Filipino. In Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu (1987), the federal district
court in Honolulu upheld the right of the employer to refuse to hire some-
one with a “heavy accent,” ruling that Fragante’s accent was not an immutable
part of his Filipino ethnic group membership. The court of appeals upheld
the ruling in 1989, and the Supreme Court refused to review the case in 1990.
In 1985-1986, James Kahakua and George Kitazaki applied for the position
of weather-service broadcaster. Although they were native speakers of En-
glish, they spoke “pidgin” English, a decided accent local to Hawaii. The posi-
tion involved broadcasting marine weather reports to ships at sea, and most
of the vessels in the area were based in California, so the National Weather
Service felt justified in refusing to hire the two men because their accents
might prevent a clear transmission of information. Kahakua and Kitazaki
sued the weather service for discrimination but lost.
Impact on Public Policy In the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Congress did not
explicitly forbid discrimination on the basis of accent. For the present, clarity
in speech is recognized as a bona fide occupational qualification for jobs in-
volving considerable oral communication with the general public. The stan-
dards for determining whether an accent is unclear tend to be subjective, so
the issue may be resolved by use of the Test of Spoken English, a standardized
test administered nationwide by the Educational Testing Service.
Michael Haas
Further Reading Laughlin McDonald’s Rights of Racial Minorities: The Ba-

sic ACLU Guide to Racial Minority Rights (2d ed. Carbondale: Southern Illinois
2
African immigrants
University Press, 1993) is one of the publications sponsored by the American

Civil Liberties Union that describes the laws governing employment discrimi-
nation. A more focused study is Rosini Lippi-Green’s English with an Accent:
Language, Ideology, and Discrimination in the United States (New York: Rout-
ledge, 1997). For an analysis of the legal issues, see Mari J. Matsuda’s “Voices
of America: Accent, Antidiscrimination Law, and a Jurisprudence for the Last
Reconstruction,” in Yale Law Journal (100, 1991), and Beatrice Bich-Dao
Nguyen’s “Accent Discrimination and the Test of Spoken English: A Call for
an Objective Assessment of the Comprehensibility of Nonnative Speakers,” in
California Law Review (81, October, 1993). Other sources that touch on the
subject of accent discrimination include Portraits of Literacy Across Families,
Communities, and Schools: Intersections and Tensions (Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum
Associates, 2005), by Jim Anderson and others; Charmian Kenner’s Becoming
Biliterate: Young Children Learning Different Writing Systems (Sterling, Va.: Trent-
ham Books, 2004); Language and Cultural Diversity in U.S. Schools: Democratic
Principles in Action (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2005), edited by Terry A. Os-
born; and Terrence G. Wiley’s Literacy and Language Diversity in the United
States (2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005).
See also Anglo-conformity; Bilingual education; Discrimination; English-

only and official English movements; Proposition 227.
African immigrants
Identification: Voluntary and involuntary immigrants to North America
from Africa
Immigration issues: African Americans; Civil rights and liberties; Slavery;

West Indian immigrants
Significance: Africans began immigrating voluntarily to the United States in

significant numbers only in the late twentieth century; however, involun-
tary African immigration to North America began during the early period
of European settlement. Through slavery, members of this group made up
one of the largest sources of migration to North America throughout early
American history. Movement from Africa to the territory of the United
States decreased sharply after the importation of slaves became illegal in
the United States in 1808 and virtually ceased with the Civil War and the
complete abolition of slavery during the 1860’s.
During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, immigration from
Europe increased greatly. As a result, African Americans became a smaller
3
African immigrants
proportion of the American population than they had been in earlier years.
Nevertheless, throughout U.S. history, African Americans have constituted
one of the nation’s largest population groups.
Involuntary African Immigration The first people of African descent

came to America with Spanish explorers during the early sixteenth century.
During the late fifteenth century, the Portuguese had established trading
posts in West Africa and had begun buying slaves from African leaders and
selling these people to other Europeans. Spanish demand for workers in the
New World in activities such as sugarcane cultivation and mining led to the
development of the Atlantic slave trade during the first two decades of the six-
teenth century.
Over the course of the sixteenth century, many European nations became
active in West Africa and began to take part in the slave trade. The Dutch be-
came the main carriers of slaves to North America in the earliest part of this
period. In early 1619, a Dutch ship brought the first African slaves to the En-
glish colony at Jamestown, Virginia. The settlers exchanged goods and provi-
sions for these slaves. The earliest Africans in Virginia were not clearly distin-
guished in status and treatment from European indentured servants, and the
Africans were often able to earn their freedom. According to slavery scholar
Imaginative depiction of the interior of a slave ship painted by Bernarda Bryson Shahn during the
1930’s. (Library of Congress)
4
African immigrants
Ira Berlin, free people made up nearly 30 percent of the black population of
Virginia’s Northampton County by 1668.
Dutch involvement in the slave trade meant that many people of African
ancestry arrived in the Dutch colony of New Netherland from about the
1620’s onward. As in Virginia, however, the condition of these first slaves was
generally better than that of slaves who arrived during later historical pe-
riods. These early slaves were allowed to own property, marry, and establish
families. When the English took possession of New Netherland in 1664, the
colony’s capital, New Amsterdam—renamed New York—contained about
300 slaves. These people constituted roughly one-fifth of New Amsterdam’s
entire population.
In the southern part of North America, African slaves began arriving in sig-
nificant numbers somewhat later than in the northern part. The French
Compagnie des Indes brought people of African ancestry to the port city of
New Orleans, at the base of the Mississippi River, during the late seventeenth
and early eighteenth centuries. As in New Amsterdam, slaves could generally
own property and engage in economic activities of their own. The free black
population also grew steadily, and the free black population of Louisiana be-
came the largest in North America, continuing to exist even until the Ameri-
can Civil War.
Expansion of the Slave Trade The eighteenth century saw great in-
creases in the numbers of African origin people arriving in North America.
These changes were results of the growth of the plantation economy. The
growth of the plantation system began in the Chesapeake region of Virginia
and Maryland at the end of the seventeenth century, fueled by the cash crop
tobacco. Big planters found African slaves a better source of labor for work-
ing this crop than indentured servants or hired hands. About 2,000 African
slaves arrived in Virginia during the 1680’s, and more than 4,000 during the
1690’s. During the first decade of the eighteenth century, this figure in-
creased again to almost 8,000 slaves newly imported to Virginia.
North American slaves came from all parts of West Africa, speaking differ-
ent languages, so that it became difficult for them to maintain a common lan-
guage or cultural identity. Achieving freedom became an increasingly rare oc-
currence. Treatment of slaves became harsher, and the lines separating black
people, who were almost all slaves, from white people, who were all legally
free, became sharper and deeper.
From Virginia and Maryland the plantation system spread to the rice-
growing regions of South Carolina and then Georgia during the first part of
the eighteenth century. Before 1710, Africans had come to these regions at a
rate of 300 or under per year. During the 1720’s, however, this rate went up to
about 2,000 new African arrivals each year, and the numbers continued to in-
crease dramatically throughout the rest of the century.
Louisiana maintained the largest free population of people of African de-
scent throughout the period of slavery. However, the cultivation of sugarcane
5
African immigrants
promoted the expansion of the plantation system in the southwestern part of

the state. After the vast expanse of territories along the Mississippi River was
joined to the United States in 1803, plantation-style slavery and the demand
for slaves increased throughout many southern lands.
With the growing importation of slaves during the eighteenth century,
American shippers began to enter the trade along with the Europeans. Rhode
Island became the most important center for shipping slaves, even though
that colony never had a significant population of slave workers of its own. By
the time the United States had adopted its Constitution in 1789, ships from
Rhode Island had carried more than 100,000 Africans to the Americas.
End of the Legal Slave Trade The Constitution of the United States im-
plicitly recognized slavery—although it did not mention the word—but it
also made provisions for the end of the slave trade. Although many of the
founders of the U.S. were slave owners, the leaders of the new nation gener-
ally believed that the practice would gradually come to an end. Thus, the
Constitution abolished the importation of slaves after the year 1808. In 1807,
the British government had adopted a prohibition on the slave trade through-
out its empire. Thus, laws in the early nineteenth century placed a brake on
involuntary migration from Africa to North America.
Despite the ending of the slave trade, slavery itself did not begin to wind
down after the foundation of the United States. A boom in the cotton trade,
promoted by the invention of the cotton gin at the end of the eighteenth cen-
tury, made plantation slavery increasingly profitable. This not only encour-
aged slave owners to keep and trade in slaves born in the United States, it also
contributed to the smuggling of slaves into the nation.
It is difficult to estimate how many Africans were brought to the United
States illegally between the prohibition of the importation of slaves in 1808
and the abolition of slavery in 1865. By some calculations, as many as 50,000
Africans may have entered the United States during that period. Official U.S.
Census records show only 551 U.S. residents who had been born in Africa in
1850 and only 526 in 1860. However, it seems reasonable to assume that the il-
legality of the importation of slaves resulted in a great official undercounting
of African origin people born after 1808. In addition, the 1870 census showed
2,657 people in the United States who had been born in Africa, and it is safe
to assume that this did not reflect a great wave of arrivals from Africa during
the Civil War and the early years of Reconstruction.
Most of the people of African descent who immigrated, voluntarily or in-
voluntarily, to the United States during the first half of the nineteenth
century were from other parts of the Americas, particularly the Caribbean.
Reflecting this, U.S. Census figures showed that, in contrast to the small num-
bers of African-born black people, there were more than 4,000 officially re-
ported foreign born blacks in total in 1850, more than 7,000 foreign-born
blacks in 1860, and more than 9,600 in 1870. Again, the big jump in numbers
in the first census after the Civil War is probably a reflection of underreport-
6
African immigrants
ing of slave immigrants before the

war.
From the beginnings of the trans-
Atlantic slave trade until the Ameri-
can Civil War, an estimated 11.5 mil-
lion people reached the shores of
the Americas on slave ships from
West Africa. Between 600,000 and
700,000 of these people probably
reached the territories that became
parts of the United States by the mid-
dle of the nineteenth century. The
greatest numbers of those imported
directly to U.S. lands came from the
West African regions of Senegam-
bia, Sierra Leone, the Windward
Coast, and the Gold Coast. By 1860,
this involuntary immigration had
provided the basis for an African A rare example of an early African immigrant
whose name is now well known is Phillis Wheat-
American population of nearly 4.5
ley, who was brought to Boston from the Senegal
million people. region of West Africa by a slave ship in 1761.
Opposition to slavery provided While working as a servant for the family of John
the basis for a small amount of emi- Wheatley, she was encouraged to develop her
gration of African Americans to Af- literary skills and became a published poet. (Li-
rica. The American Colonization So- brary of Congress)
ciety sought to end slavery in the
United States by freeing slaves and sending them back to Africa. The society
helped to establish the colony of Liberia in 1822 and, over the following de-
cade, sent 2,638 people to live there.
The End of the Era of Slavery The Civil War brought an end to the le-
gal institution of slavery in the United States. With the end of slavery came a
long period of negligible immigration of people of African descent into the
United States. Even with the illegal importation of slaves in the first half of the
nineteenth century, most of the growth in the black population of the United
States was a result of American births, rather than of immigration. From 1810
to 1860, the African American population of the United States grew from a re-
ported 1,377,808 to 4,441,830. However, since immigration expanded other
parts of the American population even more, the African American share of
the total population decreased from 19 percent in 1810 to 14 percent in 1860.
After the end of slavery, direct African immigration to the United States
was almost nonexistent, and there was little immigration of African origin
people from the Caribbean and other areas. Between 1891 and 1900, only
about 350 people are known to have entered the United States from Africa.
Moreover, many of these late nineteenth century immigrants were theology
7
African immigrants
students who were sponsored by Christian missionaries and were expected to

return to their home countries after completing their studies in the United
States. Meanwhile, after 1880, however, a great wave of immigrants began to
reach the United States from Europe. Seeking economic opportunities in the
industrializing economy of the United States, these new immigrants pro-
duced a great expansion of the size of the nation’s population, and the Afri-
can American share of the total shrank accordingly. By the time this great
wave of European immigration had ended in the 1920’s, the African Ameri-
can portion of the population had dropped 10 percent of the total.
The American occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934 brought some new
immigrants from that Caribbean nation. Haiti was one of the main sources of
the increase in the foreign-born black population of the United States from
40,339 people in 1910 to 98,620 in 1930. However, until the middle of the
twentieth century, immigrants of African descent, from Haiti and all other
places of origin, accounted for less than 1 percent of all new immigrants in
the United States.
Modern African Origin Immigration Trends During the 1920’s, the

United States adopted an immigration policy based on the national origins
quota system. This meant that immigrants were allowed to enter the United
States in numbers proportional to their homelands’ representations in the
United States at the beginning of the twentieth century. Under this system,
overall immigration decreased, and immigration of nonwhite people was par-
ticularly discouraged. In 1965, however, the United States again revised its im-
migration policy and removed most of its nationally and racially discrimina-
tory policies.
The years following 1965 saw a steady increase in the numbers of African
immigrants and immigrants of African descent from other parts of the world.
The U.S. Census of 1960 showed 35,355 immigrants from Africa living in the
United States. Only ten years later, this figure had more than doubled—to
80,143. By 2000, Census figures showed a total of 881,300 African-born immi-
grants, 512,630 of whom were classified as “black.” Black immigrants from all
parts of the world numbered only 125,322 people in the 1960 census. By
1970, all black immigrants had also more than doubled, reaching 253,458.
The 2000 census showed that the United States had well over two million
black immigrants, making up nearly 8 percent of the nation’s total immigrant
population.
The largest number of immigrants arriving from Africa in the late twenti-
eth and early twenty-first centuries came from Nigeria, Africa’s most popu-
lous nation. In 2003 alone, nearly 8,000 Nigerians immigrated to the United
States, accounting for about one-sixth of all African immigrants to the United
States during that year. The Nigerian immigrants to the U.S. in that and previ-
ous years were generally highly educated and settled in large cities. Ethiopia,
in Northeast Africa, was the second-largest source of African immigration to
the United States at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Many of these
8
African immigrants
immigrants came to the United States during the 1980’s and 1990’s, when
political and civil unrest made Ethiopia one of Africa’s largest refugee-
producing nations. Other African nations sending significant numbers of
immigrants to the United States at the beginning of the twenty-first century
included Ghana, Egypt, Kenya, Morocco, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, and
Liberia. Political upheavals in Somalia and Sudan added to the flow of immi-
grants from Northeast Africa. From 1990 through 2003, nearly 115,000 refu-
gees entered the United States from Africa, most of them from Northeast Af-
rica.
Other Sources of Black Immigrants Although African migration to

the United States increased after 1965, the largest number of immigrants of
African descent came from Latin America. In 2000, U.S. Census estimates
showed that just under 513,000 black immigrants in the United States had
been born in Africa. By contrast, over 1.5 million black immigrants had been
born in Latin America. The Caribbean was the single-largest region of origin
for these foreign born residents, with more than 1.25 million black immi-
grants from the Caribbean living in the United States in 2000. These people
represented well over half of all the nation’s immigrant population of African
descent.
Afro-Caribbean immigrants have come from both English- and French-
speaking island nations. The English-speakers have come mostly from Ja-
maica and Trinidad and Tobago, as well as from smaller nations, such as
Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and
St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The French-speakers have come primarily
from Haiti, with smaller numbers from Guadeloupe and Martinique. Haiti
was the single largest contributor of immigrants of African descent in the
United States, and by the 1990’s large Haitian communities had developed in
New York, Miami, Boston, and other urban centers. Haitian immigration to
the United States became a heated political issue during the late 1980’s and
1990’s, when large numbers of Haitian boat people began reaching the
United States. The U.S. government classified the Haitians as economic im-
migrants, rather than political refugees, and generally followed a practice of
refusing them political asylum.
Immigrants of African origin have complicated the debate over affirmative
action in the United States. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that uni-
versities and other institutions could use race as a consideration in admis-
sions decisions in order to promote the compelling national interest of di-
versity in schools and in the nation’s leadership. Courts and institutions
frequently assumed that the experiences of native-born African Americans
were an important part of this diversity. Although the Supreme Court explic-
itly denied that affirmative action could be used to compensate the descen-
dants of slaves, many supporters of affirmative action in the American public
believed that making up for centuries of exclusion was also an important goal
of affirmative action. However, foreign-born black Americans represented
9
African immigrants
some of the highest achievers in the African American population, so that af-
firmative action policies in university and professional school admissions dis-
proportionately benefited new immigrants and their children.
Further Reading
Aarim-Heriot, Najia. Chinese Immigrants, African Americans, and Racial Anxiety
in the United States, 1848-82. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003.
Study of the interrelationships among African Americans, Chinese immi-
grants, and others during the mid-nineteenth century.
Bean, Frank D., and Stephanie Bell-Rose, eds. Immigration and Opportunity:
Race, Ethnicity, and Employment in the United States. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 1999. Collection of essays on economic and labor issues relat-
ing to race and immigration in the United States, with particular attention
to the competition for jobs between African Americans and immigrants.
Berlin, Ira. Generations of Captivity: A History of African-American Slaves. Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003. Up-to-date
and authoritative history of slavery in the United States. Provides an exam-
ination of the factors shaping the growth of the African American popula-
tion during the years of slavery.
Coniff, Michael L., and Thomas J. Davis. Africans in the Americas: A History of
the Black Diaspora. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Survey of the distribu-
tion of Africans throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Conley, Ellen Alexander. The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press, 2004. Collection of firsthand accounts of immi-
grants from more than twenty nations, including modern Ghana and
Haiti.
Curtin, Philip D. The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census. Madison: University of Wis-
consin Press, 1969. Revisionist demographic study of the slave trade that
went back to primary sources for data on the numbers of Africans trans-
ported to the New World and found that the actual numbers were radically
less than those that had long been cited in historical literature.
McKinnon, Jesse. The Black Population: 2000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census
Bureau, 2001. The U.S. Census Bureau is the main source of demographic
information on the United States, and McKinnon’s book is the best place
to begin an examination of the African American population. This short
publication can be found in most libraries that contain census materials. It
is also freely available online at the bureau’s Web site.
Morgan, Kenneth. Slavery and Servitude in Colonial North America: A Short His-
tory. Washington Square, N.Y.: New York University Press, 2001. Survey of
African American slavery during the colonial era of the United States.
Reitz, Jeffrey G., eds. Host Societies and the Reception of Immigrants. La Jolla,
Calif.: Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, University of Califor-
nia, San Diego, 2003. Collection of articles on interactions between immi-
10
Afro-Caribbean immigrants
grants and other members of their new societies in countries around the
world, including the United States and Canada. Emphasis is on large ur-
ban societies. Includes chapters on African Americans and immigrants in
New York City.
Spear, John R. The American Slave Trade: An Account of Its Origins, Growth and
Suppression. Williamstown, Mass.: Corner House, 1978. Well-researched
and thoroughly documented book about the slave trade in general.
Stepick, Alex, et al. This Land Is Our Land: Immigrants and Power in Miami.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Study of competition and
conflict among Miami’s largest ethnic groups—Cubans, Haitians, and Afri-
can Americans.
Zéphir, Flore. The Haitian Americans. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press,
2004. Excellent overview of the Haitian experience in the United States.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Clotilde slave ship; Cuban immi-

grants and African Americans; Indentured servitude; Irish immigrants and
African Americans; Jamaican immigrants; Korean immigrants and African
Americans; Racial and ethnic demographic trends; Santería; Universal Negro
Improvement Association; West Indian immigrants.
Identification: Immigrants to North America of African descent from the
Caribbean islands
Immigration issues: African Americans; Cuban immigrants; Demographics;

Slavery; West Indian immigrants
Significance: African slaves imported to the Caribbean islands developed a

unique Creole culture, rich in African heritage but infused with European
notions of white supremacy that encouraged internal racism among Afro-
Caribbeans, who began immigrating to the United States even before the
American Revolution.
The Caribbean islands were the birthplace of African slavery in the New
World; between 1518 and 1860, millions of Africans were imported to the is-
lands to work the extensive sugar plantations operated by European colo-
nials. Around 43 percent of Africans transported to the Western Hemisphere
were sold as slaves in the Caribbean; less than 5 percent of these Africans were
imported to the United States and Canada.
Africans greatly outnumbered whites and native peoples on most Carib-
bean islands and therefore were able to forge their own cultural identities.
11
Workers on a Puerto Rican sugarcane plantation around 1900. (Library of Congress)
These Creole cultures, which varied from island to island, combined Old
World African folkways and elements of European and native language, reli-
gion, and customs to create a common framework from which to unite the di-
verse tribes of transplanted Africans. The harshness of Caribbean plantation
life and the resultant high death rate among Caribbean slaves necessitated a
constant flow of human cargo from Africa, ensuring the continued presence
of strong African elements in island Creole cultures. Nevertheless, the influ-
ence of dominant European colonial societies continued to permeate the so-
cial, spiritual, and economic lives of Afro-Caribbeans long after slavery ended
during the 1860’s.
Modern Afro-Caribbeans The demoralizing effect of centuries of bond-

age and cultural alienation left Afro-Caribbean cultures susceptible to the in-
fluence of colonial value systems and social norms once the institution of slav-
ery collapsed. Free Afro-Caribbean communities became structured along
rigid lines of socioeconomic caste, based primarily upon the skin color and
12
reputed ancestry of individuals and families. Many Afro-Caribbeans began to

deny or downplay their African roots and to claim European colonial heri-
tage and ancestry. Under this system, light-skinned Afro-Caribbeans of mod-
est economic means were placed above their darker counterparts, and dark-
skinned individuals who attained wealth often gained entry into the whiter
upper castes.
The system of “shading” that defined social hierarchy in Afro-Caribbean
societies often affected these societies’ perceptions of fellow Caribbeans. For
example, residents of the Dominican Republic, although clearly of mixed Eu-
ropean and African descent, traditionally identified themselves as “Spanish”
while invariably classifying neighboring Haitians as “black.” Economic and
social discrimination against Haitian immigrants to the Dominican Republic
is exemplary of the internal racism that accompanied massive internal and
interisland migration in the Caribbean during the first half of the twentieth
century. Rural (and often darker-skinned) Afro-Caribbeans migrating to ur-
ban areas and immigrants from poorer (and more Africanized) countries
were often consigned to the most squalid living conditions and the least desir-
able employment.
In the aftermath of World War II, a new black political consciousness, in-
fluenced by labor and Civil Rights movements in the United States, began to
emerge in the Caribbean in opposition to the old colonial social order. By this
time, many Afro-Caribbeans had been exposed to strains of racial and eco-
nomic protest from the United States, most notably in the teachings of black
separatist Marcus Garvey, who inspired the Rastafarian movement in Jamaica.
By the postwar era, Afro-Caribbean workers and intellectuals had joined
forces with Garveyites to form labor unions; by the 1960’s, many of these
unions had been transformed into black-dominated political parties, win-
ning significant elections in British Guiana, Trinidad, and Jamaica.
Afro-Caribbeans in the United States Afro-Caribbean migration to

North America predates the American Revolution. Slave trading between Ca-
ribbean and mainland colonies brought substantial numbers of Afro-
Caribbeans to North American port cities and exerted a palpable Caribbean
influence upon slave and free black cultures; free Afro-Caribbean immigrants
to North America attained notoriety in the black communities of New Or-
leans and other port cities.
The bulk of Afro-Caribbean immigration to the United States took place in
the twentieth century, with more than five million people of African descent
migrating from the Caribbean to the United States between 1945 and 1990.
Among these immigrants were many thousands of “boat people” from Cuba
and Haiti, who fled their native countries in search of political asylum or eco-
nomic opportunity. Thousands more arrived by more conventional means,
blending into the large Caribbean American communities in eastern urban
areas. Although many established permanent residence in the United States,
it is estimated that around 80 percent of Caribbean immigrants to the United
13
States in the latter half of the twentieth century were seasonal workers who re-
turned to their home countries.
Afro-Caribbean immigrants have exerted a profound influence on the cit-
ies and labor force of the United States, posing challenges to its social struc-
ture, educational system, and notions of assimilation and diversity. Home-
grown racial prejudices have formed the crux of many of these challenges;
many light-skinned Afro-Caribbeans, regarded as whites in their home coun-
tries, experienced racial discrimination for the first time in their lives upon
migration to the United States. Immigrants from relatively homogenous Ca-
ribbean societies often encountered ethnic groups with whom they had had
little or no previous contact, such as Mexican, Asian, and African American,
sparking occasional cultural clashes and social tensions. Groups of Afro-
Caribbean immigrants have occasionally clashed with each other, as did Cu-
ban Americans and Haitian Americans in Miami during the 1980’s.
Despite occasional difficulties, various groups of Afro-Caribbeans estab-
lished thriving communities in major metropolitan areas of the eastern and
southern United States after World War II—most notably the Cuban Ameri-
can enclaves of Miami and the “Nuyorican” community of Puerto Ricans in
New York City. These communities have contributed greatly to the cultural
and political framework of eastern urban areas and the United States as a
whole.
Michael H. Burchett
Further Reading Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and Ameri-
can Realities (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999), by Mary C.
Waters, and Crosscurrents: West Indian Immigrants and Race (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1999), by Milton Vickerman, both examine the West Indian
immigrant experience in the United States. Peter Winn, in Americas: The
Changing Face of Latin America (New York: Pantheon Books, 1992), provides
ample information on Afro-Caribbean migration to the United States and its
effect on American society. In Africans in the Americas: A History of the Black Di-
aspora (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994), Michael L. Conniff and Thomas J.
Davis compare and contrast the development of Afro-Caribbean and African
American societies. Sidney W. Mintz and Richard Price discuss continuity be-
tween African and Afro-Caribbean cultures in The Birth of African-American
Culture (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992). For a discussion of the political and cul-
tural impact of Afro-Caribbean literature, see Patrick Taylor’s The Narrative of
Liberation (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1989). Other useful sources
include Aubrey W. Bonnett’s Institutional Adaptation of West Indian Immigrants
to America (Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1982), Philip
Kasinitz’s Caribbean New York: Black Immigrants and the Politics of Race (Ithaca,
N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992), Ransford W. Palmer’s Pilgrims from the
Sun: West Indian Migration to America (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995),
Irma Watkins-Owens’s Blood Relations: Caribbean Immigrants and the Harlem
14
Alien and Sedition Acts
Community, 1900-1930 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996), and

Robert Carr’s Black Nationalism in the New World: Reading the African-American
and West Indian Experience (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2002). Ellen
Alexander Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants (Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California Press, 2004) is a collection of firsthand accounts of modern
immigrants from many nations, including Barbados, Cuba, and Haiti. A use-
ful study of the employment of Afro-Caribbean immigrants is Melonie P.
Heron’s The Occupational Attainment of Caribbean Immigrants in the United States,
Canada, and England (New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2001). Ethnici-
ties: Children of Immigrants in America (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2001), edited by Rubén G. Rumbaut and Alejandro Portes, is a collection of
papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants that in-
cludes chapters on Mexicans, Cubans, Central Americans, Haitians, and
other West Indians. This Land Is Our Land: Immigrants and Power in Miami
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), by Alex Stepick et al., ex-
amines competition and conflict among Miami’s largest ethnic groups—
Cubans, Haitians, and African Americans.
See also Cuban immigrants and African Americans; Dominican immi-

grants; Haitian immigrants; Jamaican immigrants; Latinos; Santería; Univer-
sal Negro Improvement Association; West Indian immigrants.

The Law: Four federal laws that ostensibly were passed to aid in avoiding war
with France
Date: Became law June-July, 1798
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Government and poli-

tics; Laws and treaties
Significance: The Alien and Sedition laws, three of which directly affected
immigrants, led to further debate regarding the function of the Bill of
Rights during wartime, the role of the federal government in legislating
for the states, and the process of judicial review.
News of the XYZ affair, which almost brought the United States and France to
war, descended upon the American people and their representatives in Con-
gress like a thunderbolt. It galvanized the government into action on the
high seas; it helped unite Americans against the French, just as the initial
news of British seizures had united them against Great Britain; it seriously
weakened the infant Republican Party, which was associated with Franco-
15
philism; and it firmly entrenched the Federalists in power. Even President

John Adams, for a time, seemed to relish the thought of leading the United
States against its newest antagonist, but Adams regained his sense of modera-
tion in time to prevent a catastrophe. The same cannot be said of certain ele-
ments of the Federalist Party, which exploited the explosive situation to strike
out at their political opponents.
Political Rivalries The Federalist Party, or at least its old guard, deeply
resented gains made by the Republican opposition. Many of the Federalist
leaders resented the very existence of the other political party. The High Fed-
eralists were by no means committed to a two-party system and rejected the
idea of a loyal opposition. With the Republican tide at low ebb, these Federal-
ists intended to strike a killing blow at two sources of Republican strength: the
immigrant vote and the manipulation of public opinion through the use
(and abuse) of the press.
In selecting these targets, the Federalists demonstrated an acute awareness
of the impact of the press on the growth of political parties, and they in-
tended to use their political power to muzzle the Republican press, while leav-
ing the Federalist press intact. Furthermore, Federalists expressed a deep xe-
nophobia, and they viewed people of foreign birth as threats to the fabric of
ordered liberty that they believed the Federalists had built and must pre-
serve.
Many Federalists had a long history of antiforeign sentiment. With the
United States on the verge of war with France, the Federalists were apprehen-
sive over the loyalty of thousands of French West Indian refugees who had
flocked to the United States in an effort to escape the ferment of the French
Revolution and its accompanying “Terror.”
The Federalists were further concerned by the fact that the refugees who
became U.S. citizens generally aligned themselves with the Republican Party.
Much the same was true of the Irish, who supported anyone who opposed the
English. Such conditions threatened the continued hold of the Federalists on
political power in the national government. To deal with such potential sub-
versives, foreign and domestic, the Federalist-controlled Congress passed a
series of four acts, known collectively as the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Content of the Acts Three of the acts dealt specifically with aliens or im-
migrants. The Sedition Act declared speech or writing with the intent to de-
fame the president or Congress to be a misdemeanor. The Alien Act permit-
ted the president to deport allegedly dangerous aliens during times of peace.
Neither act was enforced, however. The Naturalization Act struck at the immi-
grant vote. Previously, aliens could become naturalized citizens after residing
for five years in the United States. The new act raised the probationary period
to fourteen years.
The Sedition Act was by far the most notorious. It imposed heavy fines and
imprisonment as punishment on all those found guilty of writing, publishing,
16
or speaking against the federal gov-

ernment. By allowing a defendant
to prove the truth of statements as a
defense, the Sedition Act was a defi-
nite improvement over the English
laws of sedition libel. The fact re-
mains, however, that its intent was
the repression of political opposi-
tion and the annoying Republican
press, and the Sedition Act seemed
plainly to ignore the First Amend-
ment. Under the law, suits were ini-
tiated against the editors of eight
major opposition presses.
The principal target was the Phil-
adelphia Aurora, whose editor, Wil-
liam Duane, was prosecuted under
the act. Congressman Matthew Lyon John Adams, the second president of the United
of Vermont received a jail sentence States. (Library of Congress)
of four months and was fined one
thousand dollars for disparaging remarks he had made about President Ad-
ams. Some of these suits gave a comic air to the gross abuse of power. One
gentleman was fined one hundred dollars for wishing out loud that the wad-
ding of a salute cannon would strike President Adams in his backside.
Republican opposition to these laws was immediate. Vice President Thomas
Jefferson, himself a Republican, believed that the Alien and Sedition Acts
were designed to be used against such leading Republicans as the Swiss-born
congressman from Pennsylvania, Albert Gallatin. Republicans were con-
vinced that the Sedition Act was designed to destroy them as an organized po-
litical party. The act had passed the House strictly along sectional-party lines.
The vote was forty-four to forty-one, with only two affirmative votes coming
from south of the Potomac River, where the Republicans were strongest.
Ineffectiveness of the Laws From the Federalist point of view, the acts
were completely unsuccessful in suppressing the opposition. They were re-
sented by many, and it soon became obvious even to those who first supported
the new laws that they were as unnecessary as they were ineffective. The hand-
ful of “subversives” prosecuted under the Sedition Act hardly compensated
for the fact that its existence gave the Republicans another campaign issue.
Jefferson through the Kentucky legislature, and Madison through the Vir-
ginia legislature, penned immediate responses to the Alien and Sedition
Acts. These remonstrances, known as the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves,
aroused little enthusiasm at the time but did point out not only some of the
basic principles of the Republican Party but also some striking differences be-
tween two streams of thought within the party.
17
Both resolutions maintained that the Constitution was a compact between

sovereign states that granted to the federal government certain narrowly de-
fined powers, while retaining all other enumerated powers. If the states cre-
ated the Constitution, they had the power to decide when the federal govern-
ment had overstepped its proper bounds.
Jefferson, in the Kentucky Resolves, went much further than Madison in
assigning to the states the power to nullify a federal law—to declare it inoper-
able and void within the boundaries of a state. South Carolina was to do so in
1832, when it nullified the Tariff of 1828. The Virginia and Kentucky Resolves
had no immediate effect, but they had spelled out the theoretical position
that those advocating states’ rights could, and ultimately did, take.
The Alien and Sedition Acts took their place among a growing list of griev-
ances against the Federalist Party. The Alien Act expired in 1800 and the Sedi-
tion Act in the following year. The Naturalization Act was repealed by the
Republican-controlled Congress in 1802. The only tangible effect of these
measures was to contribute to the defeat of Federalism in 1800. However, the
mood that led to their passage was to return in later days.
John G. Clark
Edward R. Crowther
Further Reading
Elkins, Stanley, and Eric McKitrick. The Age of Federalism: The Early American Re-
public, 1788-1800. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Chapter 15 of
this gracefully written document captures the motives and mentalities of
the principals responsible for the acts.
LeMay, Michael C., and Elliott Robert Barkan, eds. U.S. Immigration and Natu-
ralization Laws and Issues: A Documentary History. Westport, Conn.: Green-
wood Press, 1999. The Alien and Sedition Acts are examined in their
broader legal context in this work.
McCoy, Drew R. The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in Jefferson’s America.
Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980. Contains an excel-
lent discussion of the competing theories of society and government ban-
tered about by Federalists and Republicans.
Miller, John C. Crisis in Freedom: The Alien and Sedition Acts. Boston: Little,
Brown, 1951. A thorough and judicious narrative of the passage of and re-
sponse to the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Sharp, James Roger. American Politics in the Early Republic: The New Nation in
Crisis. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1993. Places the Alien and
Sedition Acts in the context of paranoid politics during the 1790’s.
Smith, James Morton. Freedom’s Fetters: The Alien and Sedition Laws and Ameri-
can Civil Liberties. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1966. Contains the
best discussion of the congressional debates over the passage of these laws.
See also Federal riot of 1799; Nativism; Palmer raids.
18
Alien land laws
Alien land laws

Definition: State laws restricting the right of Asian immigrants to own land
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Discrimina-

tion; Japanese immigrants; Laws and treaties
Significance: These state measures deprived Japanese Americans of their

property rights.
Immigration from Japan to the United States increased significantly during

the final decade of the nineteenth century, with most of the Asian immigrants
settling in the Pacific states. As the number of Japanese laborers arriving in
California increased substantially, however, a strong anti-Japanese sentiment
developed: Their success threatened and antagonized the emerging labor
unions. The Asiatic Exclusion League was formed in 1905, and a campaign to
bar Japanese immigration was launched. Negotiations begun in 1906 be-
tween the United States and Japan resulted in the Gentlemen’s Agreement of
1907, which limited immigration from Japan to nonlaborers and to families
who were joining previously settled laborers. In 1907, an immigration bill was
amended to prevent Japanese laborers from entering the United States via
Hawaii, Mexico, and Canada.
The First Proposals The California legislature’s attempts to pass alien

land bills began in 1907 when it appropriated funds to investigate Japanese
agricultural involvement. The California State Labor Commission’s report,
which was favorable to the Japanese, resulted in a reprimand for the commis-
sioner. In 1910, twenty-seven anti-Japanese proposals were introduced in the
legislature. Enactment of the proposed anti-Japanese legislation was pre-
vented that year by influence from the White House and, in 1911, by Presi-
dent William Howard Taft’s direct intervention.
On April 4, 1913, a California bill that would prohibit Japanese and other
foreigners ineligible for citizenship from holding or leasing land in Califor-
nia prompted the Japanese ambassador, Viscount Chinda, to make an infor-
mal protest to the Department of State. The proposed bill in California was
modeled on an 1897 federal law barring ownership of land by aliens ineli-
gible for citizenship. The federal law, however, contained a proviso that it
would not be applicable where treaty obligations conferred the right to own
and hold land. The California bill included a clause prohibiting the leasing of
land to Japanese, but the Japanese contended that this right had been con-
ferred previously by the Treaty of 1894 and reenacted in the Treaty of 1911.
In Washington, D.C., the introduction of the 1913 California Alien Land
bill was viewed seriously. The prevailing opinion was that its effect could be
more sweeping than the problems of 1908 and could lead once again to talk
19
Alien land laws
of war. When Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan and Ambassador

Chinda exchanged mutual assurances of continuing friendship between the
United States and Japan on April 4, the Department of State expressed confi-
dence that the matter would be resolved amicably. The following day, Bryan
met with the California congressional delegation, which emphasized the ne-
cessity of the proposed legislation. Members of the delegation described how,
in many parts of California, more than half the farms were operated by Japa-
nese, and neither U.S. nor Chinese workers could compete with Japanese la-
bor. They asserted that despite the Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1907, “coolie
laborers” were arriving continuously. The feeling in California was so strong,
they reported, that people who leased land to the Japanese were ostracized by
their neighbors. Members of the delegation intimated that violent protests
against the increase in Japanese competition were imminent.
In Japan, the Tokyo press vehemently opposed the legislation. The Japa-
nese government filed a formal protest on April 7. President Woodrow Wil-
son’s position was to remain outside the conflict because he believed that the
proposed legislation lay within the rights of a sovereign state.
The final draft of the new law was adopted by the California Senate on
April 12. Ambassador Chinda presented his government’s formal protest
against the bill to the Department of State. Because of agitation in Tokyo,
where the bill was denounced by the press and where demonstrators were
calling for war, the California legislature, despite overwhelming margins in
both houses, delayed further action until May 20, when the Alien Land Law,
known also as the Webb-Henley bill,
was signed into law by Governor
Hiram Warren Johnson. The statute
barred all aliens ineligible for citi-
zenship, or corporations with more
than 50 percent ineligible alien own-
ership, from the legal right to own
agricultural land in California, and
it limited land-leasing contracts in
the state to three years’ duration.
Further Restrictions To pre-

vent the Japanese from circumvent-
ing the law, a more restrictive alien
land bill was introduced in the Cali-
fornia legislature in 1920 to forbid
the issei (first generation Japanese
Americans) from buying land in the
name of their U.S.-born children,
the nisei. It also prohibited the trans-
U.S . secretary of state William Jennings Bryan fer of land to noncitizens by sale or
around 1907. (Library of Congress) lease and established criminal pen-
20
Alien land laws
alties for aliens caught attempting to bypass the 1913 law. In a statewide bal-
lot, California voters passed the 1920 Alien Land Law by a three-to-one mar-
gin. A number of cases to test the constitutionality of the new law were
instigated by the Japanese. In 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the
issei in four of these cases. Further restrictions also were passed in a 1923
amendment, which, together with the 1924 Immigration Act, effectively de-
nied further immigration and determined the status of Japanese immigrants
in the United States. The alien land laws in California were not repealed until
1956.
During 1917, an alien land law was enacted in Arizona. In 1921, Washing-
ton, Texas, and Louisiana followed suit, as did New Mexico in 1922, and Ore-
gon, Idaho, and Montana in 1923. Other states followed: Kansas in 1925; Mis-
souri in 1939; Utah, Arkansas, and Nebraska in 1943; and Minnesota in 1945.
Susan E. Hamilton
Further Reading
in the United States, 1848-82. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003. Study
of the interrelationships among African Americans, Chinese immigrants,
and European Americans in the United States during the mid-nineteenth
century.
Chuman, Frank F. The Bamboo People: The Law and Japanese-Americans. Del Mar,
Calif.: Publisher’s Inc., 1976. Includes good coverage of the alien land laws.
Curry, Charles F. Alien Land Laws and Alien Rights. Washington, D.C.: Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1921. A contemporary account of the alien land laws.
Ichioka, Yuji. The Issei: The World of the First Generation Japanese Immigrants,
1885-1924. New York: Free Press, 1988. Includes discussion of the labor-
contracting system and the exclusion movement.
Lee, Erika. At America’s Gates: Chinese Immigration During the Exclusion Era, 1882-
1943. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Study of immi-
gration from China to the United States from the time of the Chinese Exclu-
sion Act to the loosening of American immigration laws during the 1960’s.
McGovney, Dudley. “The Anti-Japanese Land Laws of California and Ten
Other States.” California Law Review 35 (1947): 7-54. A detailed discussion
of alien land laws in relation to state, federal, and English common law up
the time of publication.
Nomura, Gail M. “Washington’s Asian/Pacific American Communities.” In
Peoples of Washington: Perspectives on Cultural Diversity, edited by Sid White
and S. E. Solberg. Pullman: Washington State University Press, 1989. Pro-
vides specifics of Washington and Texas land laws.
Takaki, Ronald, ed. Iron Cages: Race and Culture in Nineteenth Century America.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Provides insight into the origin
of anti-Asian sentiment and its connection to legislation such as the alien
land laws.
21
Amerasians
See also Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases; Chinese immi-
grants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Discrimination; Japa-
nese American internment; Japanese immigrants; Japanese segregation in
California schools; Ozawa v. United States; Page law; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Amerasians
Definition: Term coined by the American novelist Pearl S. Buck to describe
children of U.S. servicemen and women born and raised in East Asia
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Families and

marriage; Japanese immigrants; Refugees
Significance: With U.S. participation in wars and occupations in Asia, Amer-

ican servicemen have fathered children with women in several Asian coun-
tries, posing the issue of immigration rights for both Amerasian children
and their Asian mothers.
The Pearl Buck Foundation, set up in 1964 to help Amerasian children, con-
tinued its work after Buck’s death in 1973. The existence of Amerasian chil-
dren has posed knotty questions for judges and policy makers in the areas of
immigration and citizenship law. The issues involved are not merely political.
Amerasians were sometimes raised out of wedlock, sometimes adopted, and
sometimes raised by both natural parents. Studying Amerasian children and
youth in both East Asia and the United States permits sociologists and psy-
chologists to assess the relative weights of different handicaps—their status
as members of minorities, their foreign-language background, and their
fatherlessness—impeding their progress toward healthy and productive adult-
hood.
Historical Background After Japan’s defeat in World War II, U.S. ser-
vicemen occupied Japan. Within six years about 24,000 Amerasian children
were born to Japanese women. After Japan regained sovereignty in 1952, sev-
eral U.S. air bases remained on Japan’s home islands, and Okinawa remained
under U.S. occupation. Mixed marriages and the births of Amerasian babies
continued into the first years of the twenty-first century, when the United
States still stationed tens of thousands of troops in Asia. The U.S. occupation
of South Korea during the late 1940’s was followed by the Korean War. After
the armistice in 1953, some U.S. soldiers remained. Hence, some South Ko-
rean women bore Amerasian babies into the early 1980’s. Amerasian children
were also born to women from Taiwan, which was protected by the U.S. Navy
against the People’s Republic of China after 1950.
22
Amerasians
After the French left Vietnam

in 1954 and Vietnam was split into
communist North Vietnam and an-
ticommunist South Vietnam, the
United States decided to defend
the latter. About 30,000 Amer-
asian children were born to South
Vietnamese women during U.S.
involvement in the Vietnam War
from 1964 to 1975. During this
time some Amerasians were also
born to women in Laos, Cambo-
dia, and Thailand, which served
as bases for U.S. air raids into Viet-
nam. When North Vietnam con-
quered South Vietnam in April,
1975, normal economic and dip-
lomatic relations with the United
States ceased, not to be restored Pearl Buck, author of The Good Earth (1931), The
until the mid-1990’s. Hence, no Dragon Seed (1942), and other novels set in China.
Amerasian babies were born in In 1938, Buck became the first American woman to
Vietnam after 1976. receive the Nobel Prize in Literature. (Library of
In the Philippines, Amerasian Congress)
children were born soon after the
United States acquired the islands in 1898. Although independence was
granted in 1946, Amerasian births continued until 1992, when Clark Air
Force Base and Subic Bay Naval Base were closed. By 1992 about 50,000
Amerasians lived in the Philippines. In 1993, Filipino prostitutes sued the
U.S. government for financial aid in raising their Amerasian children. In No-
vember, 1997, Lorelyn Penero Miller, the Filipino daughter of a U.S. service-
man born out of wedlock, challenged the U.S. citizenship law in the U.S. Su-
preme Court.
Family, Citizenship, and Immigration Unlike France, which offered cit-

izenship rights to its colonial Eurasians, the U.S. government recognized
Amerasians as citizens only if they were born within the bonds of marriage.
Amerasians born out of wedlock could be recognized as U.S. citizens only if
specific American men recognized them as their children and provided docu-
mentary proof of fatherhood.
Out-of-wedlock births resulted from institutional obstacles to marriage as
well as from individual irresponsibility. Until 1967 several American states
prohibited white-Asian and black-Asian marriages. In 1945 U.S. immigra-
tion law still prohibited the entry of Japanese. Although the U.S. Congress
twice gave Japanese war brides the opportunity to immigrate to the United
States, many couples could not meet the deadlines. From the passage of the
23
Amerasians
McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, which permitted all Asian spouses of U.S. ser-
vicemen to immigrate to the United States, until 1965, roughly half of all Ko-
rean and Japanese immigrants to the United States were servicemen’s wives.
Until 1992 many Filipino immigrants were the wives of servicemen. Despite
the time-consuming requirement of approval by superior officers, which
sometimes came through only after soldiers had been transferred back to the
United States, more than 6,000 marriages between South Vietnamese women
and U.S. servicemen occurred between 1965 and 1972.
Most Japanese and Korean Amerasians entering the United States were
either preteen children of intact interracial families or preteen orphans
adopted by American couples. Aside from twenty college-age Korean Amer-
asians sponsored yearly by Gonzaga University after 1980, relatively few Amer-
asian teenagers or young adults from Korea or Japan have ever immigrated to
the United States.
Vietnamese Amerasians, by contrast, did not immigrate to the United
States in large numbers until they were already late adolescents and young
adults. Only a few Vietnamese Amerasian children, including many of the
2,000 orphans airlifted out of South Vietnam in April, 1975, left South Viet-
nam before the communist triumph. Although a 1982 U.S. law stipulated that
Amerasians born between 1950 and 1982 from Vietnam, Thailand, Laos,
Cambodia, and Korea (but not Japan) had priority in immigrating to the
United States, it did little for Vietnamese Amerasians. Relatives were not al-
lowed to accompany their children, and the United States had no diplomatic
relations with Vietnam. Although well-publicized reunions between preteen
Amerasian children and their fathers did occur in the United States in Octo-
ber, 1982, children claimed by their American fathers after 1975 were only a
tiny percentage of all Vietnamese Amerasians.
From 1982 to 1988 about 4,500 Vietnamese Amerasians and 7,000 accom-
panying relatives entered the United States as refugees. The Amerasian
Homecoming Act (1987) speeded up the exodus by permitting all Vietnam-
ese Amerasians born between January 1, 1962, and January 1, 1977, to immi-
grate without proving that they had a specific American father and by permit-
ting them to bring their mothers and siblings along. After 1991 Amerasians’
spouses and children could come as well. By 1994 about 20,000 Vietnamese
Amerasians and 60,000 relatives had settled in the United States.
Adjustments in Asia and the United States Because Amerasians usu-

ally had some of the physical features of their white or African American fa-
thers, those raised in East Asian countries were usually discriminated against
by their countries’ racial majorities. However, being half white was socially ac-
ceptable in the Philippines. In Japan, Amerasians raised on U.S. military
bases by intact two-parent families were shielded somewhat from prejudice.
Most Amerasians raised in East Asia, however, grew up without fathers, in soci-
eties where fatherlessness was stigmatized. Their mothers sometimes aban-
doned them to the care of relatives or orphanages or even to the streets, while
24
Amerasians
stepfathers mistreated them. In their mothers’ countries, Amerasians had dif-

ficulty in receiving an education, finding jobs, and marrying spouses. In post-
1975 Vietnam they received on average no more than one to two years of
schooling.
Fatherlessness was not confined to Amerasians reared in Asia; some Amer-
asians born in the United States, or taken there by their natural parents at an
early age, saw their childhood disrupted by parental divorce. Of all Amer-
asians in the United States, those adopted by American couples at an early
age and those whose natural parents’ marriages remained intact throughout
their childhood probably had an easier transition to adulthood than others.
Thus, Vietnamese Amerasians airlifted to the United States as small children
for adoption in 1975 and those reunited as preteen children with their natu-
ral fathers in 1982 faced fewer problems than post-1987 teenage and young
adult Vietnamese Amerasian immigrants. The latter were usually accompa-
nied by only one parent or by no parent at all and had to struggle to learn En-
glish while seeking to hold down a job.
Amerasian adolescents’ search for an acceptable ethnic identity followed a
different course in the United States than in East Asia. In the United States,
Amerasians who were half white usually suffered less from majority prejudice
than in East Asia, while half-black Amerasians suffered no more from major-
ity prejudice than African Americans in general. The latter, however, were not
always accepted by African Americans. Vietnamese Amerasians rejected in
Vietnam were often also rejected by the Vietnamese refugee community in
the United States.
Paul D. Mageli
Further Reading
Bass, Thomas A. Vietnamerica: The War Comes Home. New York: Soho Press, 1996.
Benmayor, Rina, and Andor Skotnes, eds. Migration and Identity. New Bruns-
wick, N.J.: Transaction, 2005.
Conn, Peter J. Pearl S. Buck: A Cultural Biography. Cambridge, England: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1996.
Field, Norma. In the Realm of a Dying Emperor: A Portrait of Japan at Century’s
End. New York: Pantheon Books, 1991.
McBee, Susanna. “The Amerasians: Tragic Legacy of Our Far East Wars.” U.S.
News and World Report 96 (May 7, 1984).
Spickard, Paul R. “Madam Butterfly Revisited.” In Mixed Blood: Intermarriage
and Ethnic Identity in Twentieth-Century America. Madison: University of Wis-
consin Press, 1989.
Valverde, Kieu-Linh Caroline. “From Dust to Gold: The Vietnamese Amer-
asian Experience.” In Racially Mixed People in America, edited by Maria P. P.
Root. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1992.
Westbrook, Peter. Harnessing Anger: The Way of an American Fencer. New York:
Seven Stories Press, 1997.
Williams, Teresa. “Prism Lives: Identity of Binational Amerasians.” In Racially
25
American Jewish Committee
Mixed People in America, edited by Maria P. P. Root. Newbury Park, Calif.:

Sage Publications, 1992.
Yarborough, Trin. Surviving Twice: Amerasian Children of the Vietnam War.
Dulles, Va.: Potomac Books, 2005.
See also Asian American education; Japanese immigrants; Mail-order

brides; Southeast Asian immigrants; Vietnamese immigrants; War brides; War
Brides Act; Women immigrants.
American Jewish Committee

Identification: Jewish rights and advocacy organization
Date: Founded in 1906
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Jewish immigrants; Religion
Significance: The American Jewish Committee is one of the oldest Jewish

rights organizations.
The American Jewish Committee was founded in 1906 by a group of promi-

nent American Jews in response to a series of anti-Jewish riots (pogroms) in
Russia. It was to be a defense and advocacy group dedicated to the prevention
of any “infraction of the civil and religious rights of Jews, in any part of the
world.” During and after World War I, its efforts were concentrated on aiding
refugees and combating anti-immigrant and anti-Semitic sentiment in the
United States.
During the late 1990’s, the committee’s work consisted mostly of analysis,
advocacy, and legal action relating to issues such as immigration, civil rights,
church-state relations, and social justice. In addition, it sponsors research in
such areas as Jewish family life, intermarriage, and Jewish education, and the
significance of Judaism in an age of modernity. Local chapters are encour-
aged to participate in legislative advocacy activities and involvement as amici
curiae in litigation at the local and state levels. On the international scene, the
committee has articulated a special commitment to Israel’s security and to
the support of democratic movements across the globe on the theory that the
fate of Jews is inextricably bound to the fate of democracy.
Peter J. Haas
Further Reading
Cohen, Naomi Werner. Encounter with Emancipation: The German Jews in the
United States, 1830-1914. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of Amer-
ica, 1984.
26
Anglo-conformity
Gerber, David, ed. Anti-Semitism in American History. Urbana: University of Illi-

nois Press, 1986.
See also Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants; Eastern European

Jewish immigrants; Israeli immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Jewish settlement
of New York; Jews and Arab Americans; Sephardic Jews; Soviet Jewish immi-
grants.
Anglo-conformity
Definition: Tendency of immigrants to North America to lose much of their
native cultural heritage and conform substantially to an Anglo-Protestant
core culture
Immigration issues: Language; Nativism and racism; Sociological theories
Editor of an Italian-language newspaper published in New York correcting proofs in 1943. Foreign-
language newspapers sprang up in virtually every major urban center to serve immigrant commu-
nities and made it easier for immigrants to avoid adapting to the dominant Anglo culture. (Library of
Congress)
27
Anglo-conformity
Significance: Anglo-conformity has a homogenizing effect that tends to

obliterate non-Anglo cultures.
During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Anglo-conformity

was practiced by immigrant groups who came from eastern and southern Eu-
rope—such as Poles, Italians, and Greeks. Although some members of those
groups have maintained some of the distinctive elements of their native cul-
tures, many others have become completely assimilated into the dominant
American society.
As late as the early twenty-first century, many immigrant racial groups of
non-European origin, such as Asian Americans and Hispanics, were still expe-
riencing Anglo-conformity. For example, California’s Proposition 227, which
limits the time elementary school students can spend in bilingual education,
passed with a large amount of Mexican American political support in 1998.
Since its passage, immigrants from Mexico, and their children, have faced
strong social pressure to concentrate on English, the language of the domi-
nant culture, at the expense of their own Spanish language. Anglo-conformity
may also be experienced by nonimmigrant racial minorities since they are
generally expected to follow European American styles of dress and speech
patterns when operating in the dominant American society.
George Yancey
Further Reading
Deveaux, Monique. Cultural Pluralism and Dilemmas of Justice. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cor-
nell University Press, 2000.
Gabaccia, Donna R. Immigration and American Diversity: A Social and Cultural
History. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2002.
Kramer, Eric Mark, ed. The Emerging Monoculture: Assimilation and the “Model
Minority.” Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003.
Singh, Jaswinder, and Kalyani Gopal. Americanization of New Immigrants: People
Who Come to America and What They Need to Know. Lanham, Md.: University
Press of America, 2002.
Wiley, Terrence G. Literacy and Language Diversity in the United States. 2d ed.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005.
See also Accent discrimination; Assimilation theories; Bilingual Educa-

tion Act of 1968; British as dominant group; Euro-Americans; Immigration
Act of 1924; Nativism; White ethnics.
28
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844

The Event: Nativist uprising against immigrant Irish-Catholic workers
Date: May 6-July 5, 1844
Place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Immigration issues: Discrimination; European immigrants; Irish immi-

grants; Nativism and racism; Religion
Significance: This anti-Irish riot reflected nativist prejudice against immi-

grants and afterward moved Irish immigrants to band together more to
protect themselves.
Rapid population growth, industrialization, and cultural conflict character-

ized urban America during the 1840’s and helped produce bloody anti-Irish
riots in Philadelphia’s industrial suburbs of Kensington and Southwark in the
summer of 1844. Already the second largest U.S. city in 1840, Philadelphia’s
population grew by more than one-third during the 1840’s, from twenty-five
thousand people to thirty-six thousand. Irish immigrants, hard-pressed by the
Great Famine that had ruined the potato crops in their homeland, stimulated
this growth, and they made up 10 percent of Philadelphia’s population in
1844. Prior to commuter railroads and automobiles, most people lived near
their workplace, and cities were densely populated. Low-income newcomers
such as the Irish resided in cheap, substandard housing and symbolized the ill
effects of disorderly urban growth to longtime Philadelphians.
The Irish Immigrants Lacking in job skills and capital, Irish immigrants
filled the bottom rungs in the emerging industrial order’s occupational lad-
der. As its population grew, Philadelphia expanded its involvement in large-
scale manufacturing. By 1840, half of Philadelphia’s sixteen thousand working
adults labored in manufacturing, and 89 percent of the workers in Kensing-
ton toiled in industrial trades. American-born whites predominated in such
well-paying craft occupations as ship carpenter and ironmaker, leaving low-
paying jobs requiring less skill, such as weaving, for Irish newcomers. Per-
ceiving immigrants and African Americans as competitors for jobs and hous-
ing, many white American workers used violence to drive them from trades
and neighborhoods.
During the 1830’s, Philadelphia, like other major cities, hosted a strong
working-class trade union and political movement. At its height, the General
Trades Union of Philadelphia City and County (GTU) included more than
ten thousand workers representing more than fifty different trades. Collec-
tive action in an 1835 general strike advocating a ten-hour workday suc-
ceeded in winning shorter hours and wage hikes in numerous workplaces.
GTU activists voted against conservative Whigs who opposed strikes and Irish
29
Catholic immigrants. The Panic of 1837 brought on a national economic de-

pression and weakened the GTU and undermined the solidarity of its cultur-
ally and occupationally diverse constituency.
During the 1840’s, native-born Protestant skilled workers fought for a
dwindling supply of jobs and received little help from the financially weak-
ened GTU. Evangelical Protestants from all social classes joined moral re-
form campaigns for temperance and strict observance of the Sabbath. Tem-
perance and Sabbatarianism symbolized American-born white workers’ efforts
to survive hard times through personal discipline. Workers made up the ma-
jority of temperance societies in industrial suburbs such as Kensington and
Southwark. Moral reforms often attacked immigrant cultural institutions,
such as the Roman Catholic Church and Sunday tavern visits. Economic con-
traction and moral reform eroded the GTU’s bonds of working-class solidar-
ity, which might have prevented ethnic conflict in 1844.
Nativist Forces The American Republican Party, dedicated to eliminat-

ing the influence of Catholic immigrants in public life, best exploited the
anxieties of native-born workers.
The party flourished briefly in east-
ern cities during the mid-1840’s,
drawing support from American-
born workers and middle-class pro-
fessionals such as Philadelphia’s
Lewis Levin, a struggling lawyer
and aspiring politician from South
Carolina.
In the spring of 1844, American
Republicans campaigned against
Catholic voters’ attempts to pro-
tect their children from Protestant
religious instruction in the pub-
lic schools. Protestant-dominated
Philadelphia schools used the King
James version of the Bible as a class-
room textbook. Objecting that the
King James version was not au-
thoritative, Catholics preferred the
Douay Bible, which included anno-
tations written by the Vatican. Phil-
adelphia’s Catholic bishop, Fran-
cis Kenrick, wanted public schools
Title page of a Douay Bible—which was at the heart to allow Catholic students to bring
of the 1844 riots—features an illustration of St. Pat- their Bibles to class or be ex-
rick’s Cathedral in New York City. (Library of Con- empted from Protestant religious
gress) instruction. American Republicans
30
accused Philadelphia Catholics of plotting to remove the Bible from the

schools entirely and to have priests take over classrooms.
In April, 1844, American Republicans staged rallies across the city to whip
up support for their nativist program. Violence between the Irish and na-
tivists broke out when nativists gathered near Irish neighborhoods. American
Republicans scheduled a mass meeting for May 6 in Kensington’s third ward,
a neighborhood composed mainly of Irish weavers. On May 6, rain drove hun-
dreds of nativists who traveled to the third ward rally to seek cover at the
Nanny Goat Market, a covered lot of market stalls.
Approximately thirty Irish waited at the market, and one yelled, “Keep the
damned natives out of the market house; it don’t belong to them. This
ground is ours!” Samuel Kramer, editor of the pro-American Republican Na-
tive American newspaper (named for Anglo-American nativists, not American
Indians), tried to finish his speech against the Catholic proposals for the
Douay Bible, but Irish hecklers drowned him out. A shoving match escalated
into fistfights and gunfire as nativists and Irish battled for control of the mar-
ket house. Police arrived at dusk and temporarily restored order. Four men
died, three of them nativists, and many more were wounded in the fighting.
Nativist Revenge The next day, nativists massed in Kensington for re-
venge. The Native American ran the headline: “Let Every Man Come Prepared
to Defend Himself!” A parade of nativists marched through Kensington un-
der a U.S. flag and a banner declaring, “This is the flag that was trampled un-
derfoot by Irish Papists.” Nativist mobs rampaged through Kensington for
two more days, burning homes and invading two Catholic churches, where ri-
oters defaced religious objects and looted valuables. Although Sheriff Mor-
ton McMichael tried to calm public disorder, police were too few in number
to stop the violence. Needing reinforcements, McMichael called on General
George Cadwalader, commander of the First Brigade of Pennsylvania state
militia, stationed in Philadelphia. On May 10, state troops brought peace to
the city and kept it under martial law for a week.
Tension prevailed in June, amid criticism of city officials and militia com-
manders for failing to prevent violence. American Republicans still had pub-
lic support, and Catholics worried about more violence. Catholics feared that
nativists would use July 4 patriotic celebrations as a pretext to riot. Parishio-
ners at St. Philip’s Catholic Church in Southwark, just south of Philadelphia,
hoarded weapons inside the church in order to defend it.
Hearing of the arms cache, on July 5, Levin led thousands of nativists, in-
cluding volunteer militia with cannons, to St. Philip’s to demand the weap-
ons. Stung by earlier criticism, Cadwalader’s militia promptly seized the
church and ordered nativists away. When the mob refused to move, Cad-
walader opened fire and a pitched battle involving cannon and rifle fire en-
sued for a day and a half. The militia, helped by city police, prevailed in the
fighting that left two rioters dead and dozens of state troops and civilians
wounded.
31
The American Republican Party campaigned on the riots, attacking reign-

ing politicians as the allies of Irish Catholics and making martyrs of the
nativists killed in the riots. In October, Levin and another American Republi-
can won election to the U.S. House of Representatives, and nativists captured
several county offices, mostly on the strength of votes from working-class
Kensington and Southwark. The American Republicans faded during the late
1840’s, but nativists returned during the 1850’s under the aegis of the Ameri-
can, or Know-Nothing, Party.
The riots forced Irish Philadelphians to band together as an ethnic group.
The most prominent Irish opponent of the mobs was Hugh Clark, a master
weaver and ward politician worth more than thirty thousand dollars in 1850.
Clark had stridently opposed striking Irish journeymen weavers prior to 1844.
Master weavers, some of them Irishmen like Clark, cut journeymen’s wages in
the wake of the Kensington riot, confident that few non-Irish workers would
protest the cuts. Bishop Kenrick urged conciliation and softened his public
position on the Bible controversy. American Republican anger at police and
militia actions temporarily stalled police reform, but during the 1850’s, Phila-
delphia and other cities established professional police departments to pre-
vent more riots like those of 1844.
Frank Towers
Further Reading
Davis, Susan G. Parades and Power: Street Theatre in Nineteenth-Century Philadel-
phia. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986. Examines public cele-
brations that frequently turned violent, such as the parade that became a
riot in Kensington.
Feldberg, Michael. The Philadelphia Riots of 1844: A Study of Ethnic Conflict.
Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1975. The most comprehensive ac-
count of the riots.
History. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2002. Survey of American immigration
history, with attention to ethnic conflicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
Knobel, Dale T. Paddy and the Republic: Ethnicity and Nationality in Antebellum
America. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1986. Study of
nativistic stereotypes of the Irish that fed the riot.
Lannie, Vincent P., and Bernard C. Diethorn. “For the Honor and Glory of
God: The Philadelphia Bible Riots of 1844.” History of Education Quarterly 8,
no. 1 (Spring, 1968): 44-106. Examines the Bible controversy in Philadel-
phia schools.
Laurie, Bruce. Working People of Philadelphia, 1800-1850. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1980. Provides background on workers and unions.
Montgomery, David. “The Shuttle and the Cross: Weavers and Artisans in the
Kensington Riots of 1844.” Journal of Social History 5, no. 4 (Summer, 1972):
411-446. Analyzes the conflict in terms of social class.
32
Arab American intergroup relations
Paulson, Timothy J. Irish Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005. Broad
survey of Irish immigration history.
Warner, Sam Bass, Jr. The Private City: Philadelphia in Three Periods of Its Growth.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968. Analyzes the riots in
the context of other disturbances and police reform.
See also British as dominant group; Celtic Irish; European immigrants,

1790-1892; Federal riot of 1799; German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s;
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants
and African Americans; Irish immigrants and discrimination; Irish stereo-
types; Know-Nothing Party; Nativism; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
Arab American intergroup

relations
Definition: Relationships among immigrants from different Arab countries
Immigration issues: Demographics; Middle Eastern immigrants; Religion;

Stereotypes
Significance: Although Arab immigrants share the same language and

many of them share the same religion, Islam, they are far from being a ho-
mogeneous group.
At the turn of the twenty-first century, more than one million people of Arab
origin were estimated to live in North America: more than 870,000 in the
United States and more than 188,000 in Canada.
Although figures for specific Arab national origin are not available for ei-
ther country, they are available for the state of Michigan, which has a large
population of Arab Americans. During the 1990’s, more than 77,000 persons
of Arab ancestry were living in Michigan. More than half of those people were
of Lebanese background. In 1990, Michigan was also home to 7,656 Syrians,
6,668 Iraqis, 2,695 Palestinians, 1,785 Egyptians, 1,441 Jordanians, 14,842 un-
specified Arab Americans, and 2,310 other Arabs. In addition to these Arab
Americans, the 1990 U.S. Census reported the presence of 14,724 Assyrians
(Chaldeans). Apparently in Michigan and other parts of the United States,
most Assyrians do not, contrary to the opinion of most scholars, consider
themselves Arabs.
Arab Americans come to the United States and Canada from the twenty-
one countries of the Arab League. In addition to the countries in the Michi-
gan breakdown, these nations are Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Kuwait, Libya,
33
Leading Metropolitan Hometowns

of Arab Americans
Percentage of all
Rank Metropolitan Area Population Arab Americans
1 Detroit, Mich. 61,065 7.0
2 New York, N.Y. 58,347 6.7
3 Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif. 56,345 6.5
4 Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va. 28,148 3.2
5 Chicago, Ill. 26,770 3.1
6 Boston, Mass. 22,391 2.6
7 Anaheim-Santa Ana, Calif. 15,662 1.8
8 Bergen-Passaic, N.J. 15,580 1.8
9 Houston, Tex. 15,389 1.8
10 Cleveland, Ohio 14,005 1.6
11 San Diego, Calif. 13,055 1.5
12 Pittsburgh, Pa. 12,141 1.4
13 San Francisco, Calif. 11,973 1.4
14 Miami-Hialeah, Fla. 11,344 1.3
15 Philadelphia, Pa. 10,345 1.2
16 Riverside-San Bernardino, Calif. 10,291 1.2
17 Nassau-Suffolk, N.Y. 8,837 1.0
18 Oakland, Calif. 8,668 1.0
19 Minneapolis-St.Paul, Minn.-Wis. 8,155 0.9
20 Phoenix, Ariz. 7,719 0.9
Source: Data are from U.S . Bureau of the Census, Census of Population, 1990. Washington, D.C ., U.S .
Government Printing Office, 1991.
Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Quatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Tunisia,

United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Although the numbers of immigrants
from most of these countries are too small for them to be separately counted,
these subgroups have a significant effect on intergroup and intragroup rela-
tions. One Arab American group, the Arab Jewish Americans, part of the
Sephardic Jewish population and believed to be sizable, is not counted by any
official sources. They trace their ancestry predominantly to Syria, Egypt, Ye-
men, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Morocco. It is estimated that there are
some 85,000 Arab Jews in the United States.
Demographics During the 1990’s, about 48 percent of Arab Americans

lived in twenty metropolitan areas. The largest populations were in the De-
troit, Michigan (61,065), New York City (58,347), and Los Angeles-Long
Beach (56,345) areas. In eight out of ten of the metropolitan areas with the
highest Arab American populations during that period, the median house-
hold income for Arab Americans exceeded that of the overall population. For
34
example, in the Los Angeles-Long Beach metropolitan area, the median in-
come for Arab Americans was 130 percent of that of the general population.
Overall, Arab Americans tend to be better educated than the average
American. They earn graduate degrees at a rate twice that of the general pop-
ulation. As might be expected given the level of educational achievement, in
1990, 80 percent of Arab Americans were employed versus 60 percent of all
Americans.
Most Arab immigrants to the United States seek permanent status. One ex-
ception has been Yemeni temporary male workers, who often want to earn
large sums of money to take back to their families in Yemen. Some Arab
Americans of higher educational and occupational status look down on these
Yemenis because they are less educated and poorer and have adopted the
dress and lifestyles of young working-class American men. This violation of
traditional manners is irritating to non-Yemeni Arab Americans, especially
those striving for acceptance by American society. They fear that non-Arab
Americans with ambivalent attitudes toward Arab Americans and who hold
negative stereotypes of Arabs fostered by their unfavorable portrayal in the
mass media will think less of them because of the behavior of some of the
young Yemeni men.
Arab Americans’ fears are intensified by hate crimes against them, espe-
cially since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Nine days after those
attacks, the attorney general of California reported that his office was investi-
Image Not Available
35
gating seventy separate incidents of possible hate crimes against Muslims in

his state alone.
Arab American Women Unlike their sisters in most Arab countries, Arab
American women have become strong and courageous feminists. Carol
Haddad, of Lebanese and Syrian heritage, founded the Feminist Arab Net-
work (FAN) in 1983. Its membership comprised about one hundred women,
about one-third immigrants and the rest born in the United States. FAN orga-
nized panels, wrote articles for progressive feminist newspapers, magazines,
and journals, and spoke to numerous groups about what Arab American
women wanted for themselves, non-Arab American women, and women
throughout the world. Although FAN did not last for more than a few years, it
nevertheless brought together activist Arab American women and Jewish,
Latina, Asian American, and Native American women to further feminist and
progressive causes. In 1994, the South End Press published an anthology by
Arab American and Canadian feminists entitled Food for Our Grandmothers.
Thanks to FAN’s efforts, women have served as chairs and presidents of the
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC).
The Multicultural Immersion Program The Arab American commu-

nity is a diverse and successful one. Because of the turmoil in the Middle East,
however, and the negative portrayal of Arabs in the mass media, Arab Ameri-
cans have often felt the sting of prejudice and discrimination and the tragedy
of violence and murder. At the 1984 Democratic National Convention, Afri-
can American Jesse Jackson expressed empathy for the plight of Arab Ameri-
cans, saying that “Arab Americans, too, know the pain and hurt of racial and
religious rejection. They must not continue to be made pariahs.”
During the Middle East turmoil in 1989, Arab American businesses in Chi-
cago’s black neighborhoods were frequently boycotted by African Americans.
The boycotts were motivated by the anti-Arab defamation with which the
mass media showered the nation and the failure of Americans to distinguish
between Arab Americans and overseas Arabs. All over the United States, Arab
Americans became the targets of violence, property destruction, and even
murder.
In 1996, to combat anti-Arab sentiment in Detroit, a social service agency
called New Detroit launched the Multicultural Immersion Program. Directed
by Sonia Plata, it consists of yearlong programs that bring together people
from the major ethnic, religious, and racial groups in the metropolitan area
to learn about one another through seminars presented by designated lead-
ers from each of five major groups: African Americans, Arab Americans,
Asian Americans, Latinos/Chicanos, and Native Americans. The key organi-
zations that lend support to the groups are the Charles Wright African Ameri-
can Museum, the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services
(ACCESS), American Citizens for Justice (an Asian American group), Casa
de Unidad, and the American Indian Health and Family Services agency.
36
Milestones in Arab Immigration History

Year Event
1870’s First Arab immigrants arrive in the United States.
1883 Kahlil Gibran, noted Lebanese immigrant and author, is born
(dies 1931).
1892 First Arab American newspaper, Kawkab Amerika, is published.
1898 Maronites found newspaper called Al Hoda (the enlightener).
1948 The formation of the state of Israel creates a large Palestinian
diaspora.
1961 Institute of Palestine Studies creates Maronite seminary (Our
Lady of Lebanon) in Washington, D.C.
1967 Israeli victory in Six-Day War provides stimulus to Arab
organizations to present their case to the American public.
1967 Professionals form Association of Arab American University
Graduates.
1968 Sirhan Bishara Sirhan assassinates Senator Robert Kennedy.
1972 Lobbying group National Association of Arab Americans is
founded.
Mid-1970’s Lebanese civil war divides Arab Americans.
1978 Lisa Najeeb Halaby marries King Hussein of Jordan and assumes
the name Queen Noor.
1982 American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), a civil
rights activist group, is organized.
1985 West Coast ADC leader Alex Odeh is assassinated.
1989 Council of Lebanese American Organizations, umbrella
organization lobbying for Lebanese freedom and sovereignty, is
founded.
1991 Educational outreach group, Arab World and Islamic Resources
and School Services, is created.
2001 Terrorist attacks on the United States raise American distrust of
Arabs.
The first of the seven sessions in the annual program is an orientation,

which is followed by five sessions that consist of seminars presented by mem-
bers of each of the five major groups. Each group selects ten to fifteen of its
leaders and members to organize and present an all-day, eight-hour program
to members of the other four groups. These seminars feature lectures, discus-
37
Arab American stereotypes
sions, presentation of audiovisual materials, dissemination of literature, and

other creative efforts to foster communication, mutual understanding, and
friendship among the program participants. The seventh session is a sum-
ming up of the program and graduation ceremonies. The program is under-
written by the Ameritech Corporation. Participants have access to Web sites
that deal with multicultural issues.
The Multicultural Immersion Program has become a model for all Ameri-
can communities intent on fostering positive relations among minority groups
and intergroup peace based on justice, mutual respect, and understanding.
In 1997, the program had seventy graduates.
R. M. Frumkin
Further Reading A comprehensive overview of Arab American back-

ground can be found in Gregory Orfalea’s The Arab Americans: A Quest for
Their History and Culture (Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2005).
Clear pictures of Arab Americans and their struggles for an American identity
are presented in The Development of Arab-American Identity, edited by Ernest
McCarus (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994), and in Yvonne
Yazbeck Haddad’s Not Quite American? The Shaping of Arab and Muslim Identity
in the United States (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004). The former
work deals with Arab images and stereotypes created by the mass media, anti-
Arab racism and violence, including the murder of two Yemeni immigrant
workers, and many other relevant topics. Arab American women are dis-
cussed in Evelyn Shakir’s Bint Arab (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1997). Barbara
Aswad edited Arab-Speaking Communities in American Cities (New York: Center
for Migration Studies of New York, 1974). Her book deals with Chaldeans,
Arab Christians and Muslims, Lebanese and Syrian Arab Americans, and
other significant topics related to Arab Americans. For additional titles, see
Joan Nordquist’s Arab and Muslim Americans of Middle Eastern Origin: Social and
Political Aspects—A Bibliography (Santa Cruz, Calif.: Reference and Research
Services, 2003).
See also Arab American stereotypes; Arab immigrants; Israeli immigrants;

Jews and Arab Americans; Middle Eastern immigrant families; Muslims.

Definition: North American perceptions and misperceptions about Arab
immigrants
Immigration issues: Discrimination; Middle Eastern immigrants; Stereo-

types; Women
38
Image Not Available
Significance: American stereotypes of Arab immigrants are mostly negative

and often confuse Arabs with other Middle Eastern peoples.
Social scientists have not studied stereotypes of Arab Americans in as much

detail as those of some other ethnic groups, probably because of the relatively
small number of Arab Americans in the United States. Arab American stereo-
types are revealed mostly through an examination of media coverage of
events such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the 1970’s civil war in Lebanon,
and acts of terrorism involving Arabs—particularly since the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2001—and the depictions of Arabic-speaking people in
American films and books. Although many stereotypes are of Arabs, not Arab
Americans, the characteristics that are found in them are often attributed to
Arab Americans.
The Arab stereotype is predominantly a negative image, revolving around
a number of overgeneralizations and falsehoods. Arabs have been portrayed
in the media as oil millionaires buying up the United States, white slavers, and
uncivilized rulers of kingdoms. Palestinians have been depicted as terrorists
and called derogatory names such as camel jockeys, ragheads, and sand-
suckers. Common misconceptions include the belief that Iranians are Arabs
and that all Arabs are Muslims.
39
Before 1930, Hollywood studios frequently portrayed Arabs as members of

the French Foreign Legion or royalty, Egyptians, and sheiks. Films from 1961
through 1970 depicted Arabs as royalty, murderers, sheiks, slaves, and slave-
owners and often featured harems. Many of the roles incorporated elements
designed to show the foreignness of the Arab culture and its supposed lack of
civilization in comparison with mainstream American culture. During the
1980’s and 1990’s, acts of terrorism and conflicts in the Middle East caused
Hollywood and the media to add violence and barbarism to the Arab stereo-
type. Arabs, particularly Arab men, were seen as anti-American, greedy, oil-
rich, uncivilized foreigners who were abductors of Western women and, as
Muslims, oppressors of women in general. In the media and in film, Islam has
been equated with violence, terrorism, and suppression of women.
In order to counter the negative stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimina-
tion experienced by Arab Americans, numerous scholars have published pa-
pers on the topic, and several organizations such as the Association of Arab
American University Graduates, the Institute of Middle Eastern and North
African Affairs, and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee have
been created to address these topics. One of the concerns about the negative
stereotypes in the media is that they are not countered by positive portrayals.
In particular, Arab American children are hardly present on television, and
the Islamic religion is rarely depicted favorably.
Francis C. Staskon
Further Reading
Afzal-Khan, Fawzia, ed. Shattering the Stereotypes: Muslim Women Speak Out. New
York: Olive Branch Press, 2005.
Cole, David. Enemy Aliens: Double Standards and Constitutional Freedoms in the
War on Terrorism. New York: New Press/W. W. Norton, 2003.
Elaasar, Aladdin. Silent Victims: The Plight of Arab and Muslim Americans in Post
9/11 America. Bloomington, Ind.: Author House, 2004.
Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck. Not Quite American? The Shaping of Arab and Muslim
Identity in the United States. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004.
Nordquist, Joan. Arab and Muslim Americans of Middle Eastern Origin: Social and
Political Aspects—A Bibliography. Santa Cruz, Calif.: Reference and Research
Services, 2003.
Orfalea, Gregory. The Arab Americans: A Quest for Their History and Culture.
Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2005.
See also Arab American intergroup relations; Arab immigrants; Israeli im-
migrants; Jews and Arab Americans; Middle Eastern immigrant families; Mus-
lims.
40
Arab immigrants
Arab immigrants
Identification: Immigrants from Arabic-speaking nations of the Middle
East
Immigration issues: Demographics; Middle Eastern immigrants; Religion
Significance: Arab Americans are an emerging group of U.S. citizens with

an interest in the Middle East. The rise of Israel and Zionism have helped
this group coalesce; however, Arab Americans have faced serious conflict
with the influential American Jewish community.
Arab Americans are U.S. citizens who have roots in Arabic-speaking coun-
tries. Because Arab Americans are internally divided by religion and country
of origin, reliable statistics on this group are difficult to obtain. Moreover,
given the strong commitment of the United States to Israel, many individuals
are reluctant to identify themselves as Arab Americans. Between one million
and three million Americans are of Arabic or part-Arabic descent, but esti-
mates vary greatly because of poor statistics.
Arab Americans are difficult to describe as a group because they often
downplay or deny their ethnic origins in order to gain greater acceptance in
an American mainstream that tends to stereotype them as “camel drivers” or
probable terrorists and often compares their homelands unfavorably with the
state of Israel. Arab Americans are generally included in the white category in
U.S. Bureau of Census records, although on occasion some individuals may
be classified as “other Asian.” In key urban areas such as Detroit, Michigan,
Arab American shopkeepers and entrepreneurs have experienced clashes
with the African American community.
Definition and Overview Arab Americans are all non-Jewish individuals

claiming ancestral roots in Arabic-speaking countries from Morocco to Syria
and Saudi Arabia or Yemen with minor exceptions such as Chaldean- and
Kurdish-speaking individuals. Americans unfamiliar with the Middle East of-
ten assume that all Muslims native to the region are Arabs. Therefore, Turk-
ish and Iranian (Persian) Americans, who are Muslims but not ethnically
Arabs, are often mistakenly believed to be Arab Americans. Arab Americans
are far more likely to be Christian than are natives of their home countries, al-
though a majority of Arab immigrants since the 1960’s have been Muslim.
During the late 1990’s, the Arab American community was believed to be
about half Christian and about half Muslim, with Christians being more ac-
culturated and accepted in the United States. Arab American Christians of-
ten are indistinguishable from other Americans by the second generation, al-
though Arab American Muslims form a more distinct group.
Middle Eastern problems such as the Lebanese civil war during the 1970’s
41
Arab immigrants
have pitted Arab American Christians against Arab American Muslims. How-
ever, since the Israeli victory in the Six-Day War in 1967, Arab Americans have
begun to organize to confront hostile stereotypes in the press and discrimina-
tory practices that often imperil their civil rights and employment opportu-
nities. Arab American activists risk potentially serious conflict with the more
established American Jewish community when they call on the U.S. govern-
ment for an “even-handed” (that is, less pro-Israel) Middle East policy. How-
ever, both Arab Americans and American Jews may be able to serve as con-
structive bridges between the United States and the Middle East and help
them return to the generally good relations enjoyed before 1948.
Early History Early Arab American immigrants came to the United

States between 1870 and World War I. Most Arabic-speaking individuals who
immigrated to the United States during this period were subjects of the Turk-
ish Ottoman Empire, and immigration authorities often incorrectly called
them Turks. Immigrants described as “other Asian” were in many cases
Arabic-speaking.
Arab immigrants during this period were predominantly Orthodox or
Eastern Catholic (Uniate) Christians. They often identified themselves by
their religious loyalties or local origins, and very few of these pioneers
stressed their Arab identity. Most came from the area that later became Israel,
Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, and they frequently called themselves Syrian.
Some immigrants were urban artisans and skilled laborers, but most were
peasants, less than half of whom were literate in their native Arabic.
Arab immigrants quickly became peddlers, and many participated very
successfully in the free enterprise system. A minority among the Arab immi-
grant population turned to factory labor, but peddling allowed greater pos-
sibility for financial success and more opportunities to learn English and
become acculturated. Some Arab American individuals established small
businesses in cities and towns. Arab American communities grew in urban
centers such as Boston, New York, and Detroit, and hard work produced suc-
cess for many Arab Americans.
Early immigrants did not bring clergy with them from the Middle East.
Therefore, Arab American community leaders worked to secure clergy to
serve their compatriots. Most Arab immigrant clergy were marginally edu-
cated and prone to sectarian and ethnic factionalism. However, Maronite,
Melkite, and Orthodox Christian churches were organized in New York to-
ward the end of the nineteenth century.
Arab American newspapers thrived between 1892, when the first Arabic
newspaper was established in New York, and the 1920’s. By the late 1920’s, the
number of Arabic readers was in decline because immigration had been lim-
ited by the Immigration Act of 1924, and the children of earlier immigrants
spoke only English. The children of both Christian and Muslim immigrants
frequently married outside their ethnic groups, and many lost their Arab
identity.
42
Arab immigrants
From the mid-1920’s to World War II, immigration declined. After the pas-
sage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the United States ac-
cepted significant although disputed numbers of Arab immigrants from all
parts of the Arabic-speaking world. Most have been Muslims, and many have
been educated professionals who originally entered the United States as stu-
dents. New Arab groups, especially Egyptian Copts and Yemenites, have be-
come important in the changing American cultural mosaic.
Arab American Organizations Since the mid-1960’s, an era emphasiz-

ing multiculturalism and the rediscovery of ethnic roots, Arab Americans
have sought to foster pride in their Middle Eastern heritage. Significant Arab
American organizations include the Association of Arab American University
Graduates (formed in 1967), the National Association of Arab Americans
(1972), the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (1982), Arab
World and Islamic Resources and School Services (1991), the Council of Leb-
anese American Organizations (1989), the El Bireh Palestine Society of the
USA (1981), and the Institute for Palestine Studies (1961).
Because the Arab American community includes many well-educated pro-
fessionals, the Association of Arab American University Graduates (AAUG)
has been very active since its founding in 1967. This tax-exempt educational
and cultural organization promotes understanding between the American
and Arab worlds through an annual convention, a strong publication pro-
gram, speakers, and support of human rights in the Middle East and else-
Image Not Available
43
Arab immigrants
where. In its early years, the AAUG attracted post-1948 immigrants while the
National Association of Arab Americans gained more U.S.-born individuals.
By the 1990’s, this distinction had largely disappeared.
The program of the twenty-ninth annual convention during October,
1996, in Anaheim, California, illustrates the diversity of concerns of Arab
Americans. Both Democratic and Republican speakers were present. The cul-
tural and legal status of the Arab American community as well as its demo-
graphic makeup provided the focus for several sessions. The group also
scheduled sessions on Palestinian issues and their connection to Arab Ameri-
cans, the status of Arab American women, and studies of Arab American ur-
ban communities in the United States.
The National Association of Arab Americans (NAAA) lobbies Congress
concerning issues of concern to Arab Americans. A February, 1996, state-
ment by Khalil E. Jahshan, president of the NAAA, illustrates the group’s pub-
lic profile. Jahshan addressed the Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs Sub-
committee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to request that the
ban on the use of U.S. passports for travel to Lebanon be lifted for both hu-
manitarian and business reasons. In his statement, Jahshan spoke with pride
of the work of Lebanese Americans in Congress and praised Senator Spencer
Abraham of Michigan and Representative Nick Joe Rahall of West Virginia
for their support. The ban was lifted during the following year.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) confronts the
civil rights issues facing the Arab American community. It has never had uni-
versal Arab American support because the head of the Maronite Catholic
Church forbade its members from joining when the group did not support
the Phalangist cause in the Lebanese civil war. However, since its founding by
former South Dakota senator James Abourezk, a Lebanese American, the
group has made significant progress on issues of concern to the Arab Ameri-
can community.
To protect the civil rights of Arab Americans, the ADC’s department of le-
gal services aids individuals who have experienced defamation and discrimi-
nation based on their Arab ethnicity. ADC wants the federal Office of Man-
agement and Budget to add a separate racial designation for Arab Americans
to the record-keeping efforts of governmental agencies because it believes
that Arab Americans are racially targeted and that anti-Arab hate crime is
hard to document because it is difficult to separate relevant data regarding
Arab Americans from data concerning other groups.
In an attempt to combat negative portrayals of Arabs in the media, the
ADC media and publications department publishes a bimonthly newsletter,
ADC Times, as well as special reports and “action alerts” on issues of concern.
In addition, the organization’s department of educational programs spon-
sors the ADC Research Institute, which encourages public school teachers to
provide a balanced portrayal of Arab history and culture.
Arab World and Islamic Resources and School Services (AWAIR), founded
in 1991, provides educational outreach at both the elementary and second-
44
Arab immigrants
ary school levels. To improve public understanding of the Arab world, this
group conducts teacher training and provides a summer institute for teach-
ers. To celebrate National History Day, this group donates an Arab and Is-
lamic History Award. Book-length publications offer recommended curric-
ula targeting both the elementary and the secondary school student.
The Council of Lebanese American Organizations (CLAO), an umbrella
organization, lobbies for freedom and sovereignty for Lebanon and the with-
drawal of all foreign troops, both Israeli and Syrian. It provides the monthly
report Adonis as well as a monthly newsletter Lebanon File. In addition, this
Lebanese American organization offers the annual Cadmus Award.
The El Bireh Palestine Society of the USA (EBPSUSA), founded in 1981,
attempts to unite former residents of El Bireh now residing in the United
States. It wishes to preserve traditional Arab culture and values in a new
American environment and to facilitate contact among members. It offers ed-
ucational and children’s services. By focusing on remembered ties to a local-
ity, this group strengthens the local allegiances of its members.
The Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS), founded
in 1961, is a research-oriented, nonprofit, independent organization formed
to study the Arab-Israeli conflict and status of the Palestinians. The best-
known publication of IPS is the Journal of Palestine Studies: A Quarterly on Pales-
tinian Affairs and the Arab Israeli Conflict. IPS also has an extensive list of publi-
cations in Arabic, English, and French.
Despite the existence of these organizations, Arab Americans have contin-
ued to experience significant civil rights problems in education, employment,
immigration law, and public accommodations. Moreover, whenever crises de-
velop in the Middle East or terrorist acts such as the bombing of the World
Trade Center in New York in 1993 or the bombing of the Oklahoma City Fed-
eral Building in 1995, the Arab American community braces for significant
hostility from the American population. At the time of the 1995 Oklahoma
City bombing, members of the news media and others immediately specu-
lated that Arab terrorists were the murderers but were later proved wrong.
Hate Crimes and Targeting Issues The ADC uses the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) definition of a hate crime:
a criminal offense committed against a person or property which is motivated,

in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, ethnic/
national origin group, or sexual orientation group.
The situation after the devastating terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon building was much graver than
any that had occurred before. The fact that the perpetrators of the attacks
were Arabs was almost immediately known, and incidents of hate crimes
against Arab and Muslim Americans increased dramatically. During the first
days following the attacks, incidents were reported from all over the United
45
Arab immigrants
States. Incidents included many violent attacks on mosques and Arab Ameri-
can community centers and assaults on people assumed to be from the Mid-
dle East—including many Asian Indians who were neither Middle Easterners
nor Muslims.
Among the hundreds of incidents reported shortly after September 11, a
Middle Eastern store clerk in Alabama was beaten. In Anchorage, Alaska, van-
dals did several hundred thousand dollars in damage to a print shop owned
by an Arab American. In Chicago, a firebomb was thrown at an Arab Ameri-
can community center, and windows were broken in an Arab American-
owned convenience store.
In Indiana, a man wearing a ski mask fired an assault rifle at a Denton gas
station at which an American citizen from Yemen was working. Another Indi-
ana man rammed his car into Evansville’s Islamic Center. In California alone,
more than seventy incidents of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim crimes were re-
ported within the first ten days after the attacks. These incidents ranged from
the painting of racist graffiti on schools and other locations and the stoning
of several mosques to the burning down of a church with a predominantly
Arab American congregation and violent assaults on individual persons.
Perhaps more serious than these hate crime incidents is evidence of gov-
ernmental targeting of individuals perceived to be Arab American or Muslim.
Although the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) denies targeting Arab
Americans or including Arab descent as part of its terrorist profile, Arab
American individuals repeatedly face detention and interrogation at air-
ports, an experience not shared by members of many other groups.
Arab Americans are often deported by the Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service (INS) under unusual legal provisions that allow the use of secret
and unreliable evidence not subject to challenge. In a November 8, 1995, de-
cision of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, eight Palestinians won a sig-
nificant civil rights victory over INS efforts to deport them for their alleged
ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The court held that
aliens had the same freedom-of-expression rights as United States citizens.
Despite this success, Palestinian immigrants who protest Israeli actions such
as the 1982 invasion of Lebanon remain vulnerable to deportation threats.
Media Bias The Progressive Magazine documents anti-Arab media bias in an

August, 1996, article entitled “Up Against the Wall,” detailing brutal U.S. Cus-
toms treatment of Arab women at the San Francisco airport. It also notes that
both U.S. News and World Report and The New Republic incorrectly stated that
the Prophet Muhammad advocated breaking treaties and broke the Treaty of
Hudaybiah in 628. Only the first magazine retracted its error. Many Arab
Americans see media bias against the Arab world and their poor treatment at
the hands of U.S. government agencies as intertwined issues.
Prominent Arab Americans From assassin to peacemaker, from author

to queen, Arab Americans have achieved prominence in many fields. One of
46
Arab immigrants
the best-known Arab Americans is Lebanese-born artist and author Kahlil

Gibran, who made a difficult cultural transition between a mountain village
in late Ottoman Lebanon and turn-of-the-twentieth-century Boston. Although
he was active in many cultural fields, Gibran is best remembered today as the
author of The Prophet (1923).
Another well-known Arab American is Queen Noor of Jordan, the widow
of King Hussein. She was born Lisa Najeeb Halaby in 1951, in the United
States, to an Arab American family with Syrian roots. She received her B.A. in
architecture and urban planning in 1974 as part of Princeton University’s
first coeducational class. When she married King Hussein on June 15, 1978,
she converted from Christianity to Islam. They had four children, two sons
and two daughters. She has patronized many educational and cultural orga-
nizations in Jordan, and she has consistently exhibited an interest in work
that enhances the welfare of women and children. Given her unique cross-
cultural perspective, Queen Noor has attempted to serve as a bridge between
American and Arab cultures. She supported the establishment of the Jorda-
nian society in Washington in 1980 to promote better understanding and
closer relationships between the United States and Jordan.
Two Arab Americans who have made their mark in politics are Spencer
Abraham and George Mitchell. A conservative Republican, Abraham was
elected to the U.S. Senate from Michigan in 1994. The Lebanese American
Abraham received his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University in
1974 and his J.D. from Harvard in 1979. After teaching at the Thomas J.
Cooley School of Law from 1981 to 1983, he became Michigan Republican
chair in 1983. He served as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle from
1990 to 1991 and was cochair of the Republican National Committee from
1991 to 1993. He failed in his bid for reelection to the Senate in 2001, but
president George W. Bush made him secretary of energy in 2001. Although
he does not stress his Arab ancestry outside Detroit’s Arab community, Abra-
ham has a strong interest in the Middle East. He values his family’s immigrant
past and has worked hard to fight severe restrictions on new immigration.
Mitchell, a Lebanese American born in Waterville, Maine, served as U.S.
senator from Maine and Democratic majority leader during the 1980’s. As a
diplomat in Northern Ireland during the administration of Bill Clinton, he
helped negotiate a peace agreement between Roman Catholics and Protes-
tants in 1998.
Perhaps the most infamous Arab American is Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, born
in Jersusalem on March 19, 1944. He became a resident of the United States
in 1957 but remained an outsider who resented American economic and po-
litical aid to Israel. Angry over his family’s losses in the War of 1948 and U.S.
policy supporting Israel, Sirhan assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy on
June 5, 1968, the day that Kennedy won the Democratic presidential primary
in California. In addition to killing Kennedy, Sirhan assaulted five other peo-
ple. After receiving a death sentence, Sirhan had his sentence commuted to
life in prison. His assassination of Kennedy may have changed the course of
47
Arab immigrants
U.S. political history because Kennedy appeared to have a realistic chance of

receiving the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination. At the time, the
press described Sirhan as a Jordanian because the term “Palestinian” had not
yet come into use.
Arab American Churches The Antiochian Orthodox Church is based in

Syria, although it is now increasingly active in the United States. Metropolitan
Philip heads the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North Amer-
ica, headquartered in Englewood, New Jersey. Unlike most Arab Orthodox
churches, the Antiochians do not focus solely on their own ethnic communi-
ties and Middle Eastern concerns. A notable example of Arab acculturation
to life in the United States, this Arab-based church has sought and received
the membership of many non-Arab Americans, including a significant num-
ber of former Episcopalians unhappy with what they perceive as liberal trends
in belief and practice in the Episcopal Church.
The Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate-Archdiocese of North America, an
Egyptian-based group, owes allegiance to H. H. Pope Shenouda III of Alexan-
dria and Cairo, Egypt. The North American bishop is H. G. Bishop Surial,
who resides in New Jersey, home to a Coptic seminary. The Egyptian Copts
practice a form of Eastern Orthodoxy that dates from antiquity. They are gen-
erally considered the descendants of the ancient Egyptians because Egypt was
Coptic Christian before it became Muslim.
Maronite Catholics are an Eastern Rite church that has been in full com-
munion with Rome since the sixteenth century. Lebanese immigrants have
brought the Maronite Church to the United States from its native Lebanon.
The Maronites are notable for their married clergy. Maronite parishes exist in
Austin, Texas; Detroit; New York City; Washington, D.C.; and other U.S. cit-
ies. Our Lady of Lebanon Seminary in Washington, D.C., established in 1961,
is the only Maronite Catholic seminary outside Lebanon. Priests from twenty-
four American Maronite Catholic churches participated in the foundation of
the seminary. During the Lebanese civil war in the 1970’s, the Maronites in
the United States and the Middle East allied with Israel. This caused severe
conflict with other Arab American groups, especially those strongly support-
ing the Palestinian struggle for statehood.
Susan A. Stussy
Further Reading A comprehensive overview of Arab American back-

ground can be found in Gregory Orfalea’s The Arab Americans: A Quest for
Their History and Culture (Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2005). The
Arab American Directory (2d ed. Alexandria, Va.: Arab Media House, 1997) pro-
vides a comprehensive view of the Arab American community in Washington,
D.C. “Up Against the Wall” in the August, 1996, issue of The Progressive illus-
trates media bias against Arabs and Muslims. Michael W. Suleiman’s “Arab
Americans: A Community Profile,” in Islam in North America: A Sourcebook, ed-
48
Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants
ited by Michael A. Koszegi and J. Gordon Melton (New York: Garland Pub-
lishing, 1992), surveys the nineteenth and twentieth century Arab American
experience. “Ninth Circuit: Aliens Have First Amendment Rights,” in The Na-
tional Law Journal (November 27, 1995), describes the Palestinian Los An-
geles Eight’s fight against the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Jean
Gibran and Kahlil Gibran’s Kahlil Gibran: His Life and World (New York: Inter-
link Books, 1991) shows how an immigrant from an isolated and impover-
ished village in Lebanon became an important cultural figure in turn-of-the-
twentieth-century Boston. Issues of Arab American identity and challenges to
their rights in post-September 11, 2001, America are discussed in Yvonne
Yazbeck Haddad’s Not Quite American? The Shaping of Arab and Muslim Identity
in the United States (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004) and Aladdin
Elaasar’s Silent Victims: The Plight of Arab and Muslim Americans in Post 9/11
America (Bloomington, Ind.: Author House, 2004). For studies of major Arab
communities in two states, see Janice Marschner’s California’s Arab Americans:
A Prequel to California, An International Community Understanding Our Diversity
(Sacramento, Calif.: Coleman Ranch Press, 2003) and Rosina J. Hassoun’s
Arab Americans in Michigan (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press,
2003). Arab American literature is the subject of Dinarzad’s Children: An An-
thology of Contemporary Arab American Fiction (Fayetteville: University of Arkan-
sas Press, 2004), edited by Pauline Kaldas and Khaled Mattawa. For additional
titles, see Joan Nordquist’s Arab and Muslim Americans of Middle Eastern Origin:
Social and Political Aspects—A Bibliography (Santa Cruz, Calif.: Reference and
Research Services, 2003).
See also Arab American intergroup relations; Arab American stereotypes;

Israeli immigrants; Jews and Arab Americans; Middle Eastern immigrant fam-
ilies; Muslims.
Ashkenazic and German

Jewish immigrants
Identification: Jewish immigrants to North America from Germany and
central and eastern Europe
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants; Jewish immi-

grants; Religion
Significance: These earliest Jewish immigrants to the United States have

formed the predominant part of the nation’s Jewish American population.
49
During the second half of the

seventeenth century, German
and Ashkenazic Jews from the
central and eastern European
countries of Germany (Holy
Roman Empire), Poland, and
the Austro-Hungarian Empire
came to North America by a
variety of routes. Ashkenazic
Jews are Jews from eastern Eu-
rope who spoke Yiddish and
lived in separate enclaves, or
ghettos, mainly in modern-day
Russia and the Baltic countries
outside Germany. Some came
to America after the Dutch
lost control of Brazil in 1654,
and others came directly to
New Amsterdam before it was
added to the British Empire
by the duke of York, after
whom it was renamed New
York City.
New York City was the first
Immigrants reading sacred texts on the Jewish new year to allow Jews to build a house
in 1907 in New York City. (Library of Congress) of worship and purchase land
for a cemetery. Although indi-
vidual Jews and Jewish families can be found in the early colonial records of
all of the thirteen original colonies, Charleston, South Carolina, was home to
the largest Jewish community. Mediterranean Jews were predominant, al-
though all of the colonial American Jewish congregations had large percent-
ages of Ashkenazic and German Jews who came to the British North Ameri-
can colonies with the aide of London and Caribbean merchants.
After the American Revolution, immigration increased slowly, and by the
1830 U.S. Census, the Jewish population had reached nearly 3,000, predomi-
nantly Ashkenazic and German Jews. The European Enlightenment, the pas-
sage of laws preventing Jews from entering professions and leaving their ghet-
tos, and new taxes, combined with the unsuccessful revolution in Poland and
throughout central and eastern Europe in 1836, brought a dramatic increase
in emigration by German-speaking Jews throughout the 1840’s and 1850’s. By
the outbreak of the U.S. Civil War in 1861, there were 150,000 Jewish Ameri-
cans, more than 90 percent of whom were Ashkenazic and German Jews.
During this era, large numbers of trained rabbis came to the United States,
and denominational divisions followed. In 1834, German Jews seeking to
anglicize the liturgical service founded Charleston’s Society of Reformed Is-
50
raelites. Isaac Leeser, the promoter of the Jewish Sunday School movement,
anticipated the Conservative Jewish movement that emerged later in the cen-
tury. This era also saw the publication of several Jewish periodicals, including
one by Rabbi Isaac Meyer Wise, which became a springboard for the creation
of the first Jewish seminary and the establishment of the reformed Union of
American Hebrew Congregations.
From the middle of the nineteenth century to its final decade, the influ-
ence of German Jews in business and in Jewish social, cultural, and religious
life reached its apex. The German Jewish community began to seek recogni-
tion of its expanding economic success, creating a separation between the
German Jews and the later-arriving Ashkenazic Jews from Russia, which led to
more sectarian and social divisions within the Jewish religious and secular
communities.
As new immigration expanded the number of American Jews beyond the
four million mark, American “popularism” and the reemergence of the Ku
Klux Klan during World War I led to the passage of a series of immigration
acts, the last of which (Immigration Act of 1924) changed the base year for
computing national immigration quotas from 1920 to 1890 and had the
greatest impact on Jewish immigration. The decrease in new immigration
meant that the German and Ashkenazic Jewish groups would continue to be
the dominant group in the Jewish American population. Jewish Americans
numbered nearly six million during World War II, and in the second half of
the twentieth century, their numbers did not increase.
Sheldon Hanft
Further Reading
ica, 1984. Scholarly study of the reaction of this group to legal equality and
citizenship.
Meltzer, Milton. Bound for America: The Story of the European Immigrants. New
York: Benchmark Books, 2001. Broad history of European immigration to
the United States written for young readers.
Sterba, Christopher M. The Melting Pot Goes to War: Italian and Jewish Immi-
grants in America’s Great Crusade, 1917-1919. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI, 1999.
See also American Jewish Committee; Eastern European Jewish immi-

grants; Israeli immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Jewish settlement of New York;
Jews and Arab Americans; Sephardic Jews; Soviet Jewish immigrants.
51
Asian American education

Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Education;
Japanese immigrants
Significance: Asian Americans have gained a reputation for high educa-

tional achievement. To some extent, this reputation reflects actual perfor-
mance, and this performance has been part of the debate about why eth-
nic and racial groups vary in educational achievement.
The educational achievements of Asian Americans have attracted a great deal

of scholarly and popular attention. Popular interest in Asian American edu-
cational performance often involves comparing this group with members
of other minority groups, heightening the perception of Asian Americans
as members of a so-called model minority, a stereotype that often makes
Asian Americans uncomfortable. Scholars interested in immigrants, minority
groups, and influences on education have studied the educational perfor-
mance of various Asian American groups in order to obtain insight into how
immigrant membership and minority group membership may be related to
achievement in school.
Levels of Achievement Although it is difficult to discuss the educational

performance of such a diverse group, Asian Americans do seem to show over-
all levels of achievement that are quite high. Moreover, they begin to distin-
guish themselves educationally at fairly early ages. In an analysis of 1980 U.S.
Census data presented in their book Asians and Pacific Islanders in the United
States (1993), Herbert Barringer, Robert W. Gardner, and Michael J. Levin
noted that Asian Americans showed high rates of preschool attendance. This
was particularly true for Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, and Asian Indians. The
1990 U.S. Census showed this pattern continuing. About 24 percent of all
Asian American children under six years of age were enrolled in school, com-
pared with 21 percent of white children. Among Chinese, Taiwanese, Japa-
nese, and Thai American children, rates of early school attendance were
particularly high, with 27 percent of Chinese, 31 percent of Taiwanese, 31
percent of Japanese, and 30 percent of Thai children under six years of age
enrolled in school.
School enrollment, however, is not the same thing as school performance.
However, data from the 1988 National Educational Longitudinal Study show
that as early as the eighth grade, Asian American children display higher lev-
els of educational aspiration than other American children. According to
these data, 43 percent of Asian American children reported that they aspired
to education beyond a bachelor’s degree, while only 25 percent of white
eighth-graders wanted to pursue postgraduate education.
52
Asian American children are more likely than other American students
to reach high school and stay in high school. Less than 6 percent of Asian
Americans age sixteen to nineteen were high school dropouts in 1990, com-
pared with nearly 7 percent of white Americans and 16 percent of African
Americans. There were substantial variations among Asian groups; however,
only the three most economically underprivileged Southeast Asian refugee
groups (Cambodian, Hmong, and Laotian Americans) showed dropout rates
that were higher than those of white Americans, and all of the Asian American
groups had dropout rates that were lower than those of African Americans.
College entrance examinations are among the most commonly used indi-
cators of high school performance. Although breakdowns by particular Asian
groups are not available, the scores of Asian Americans in general were as
high as the scores of any other racial group or higher. On the American Col-
lege Test (ACT), for example, the average Asian American score was 21.7,
equal to the average score for whites and higher than the average score for Af-
rican Americans (17.1). The average Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) score for
Asian Americans, 1056, was higher than that for members of any other racial
or ethnic group, including white Americans (1052). Asian Americans tended
to score much higher than white Americans on the math part of the test (560
for Asians, compared with 536 for whites) and substantially lower on the ver-
bal part of the test (496 for Asians, compared with 526 for whites). This sug-
gests that Asian American scores would have been even higher had many of
them not been hampered by relatively weaker English proficiency.
Students of a Chinese school in New York City around 1910. (Library of Congress)
53
Asian Americans were more likely than either white Americans or African
Americans to be enrolled in college in 1990. Although 29 percent of whites
and 23 percent of African Americans age eighteen to twenty-five were attend-
ing college in that year, 46 percent of Asian Americans in this age category
were enrolled in higher education. Once again, there were substantial varia-
tions among Asian American groups, but only the Hmong and the Laotian
Americans, two of the most recent and most economically underprivileged
Asian American groups, showed lower rates of college enrollment than the
majority white population.
Theories of Asian Educational Achievement According to research-

ers Stanley Sue and Sumie Okazaki, in their 1990 article “Asian American Ed-
ucational Achievement,” published in the American Psychologist, theorists have
usually attributed Asian American school achievement either to innate, ge-
netic characteristics of Asians or to cultural characteristics. Genetic explana-
tions address the problem by citing the performance of Asians on intelli-
gence quotient (IQ) tests and other measures of ability as evidence of higher
levels of innate intellectual ability among Asians. Psychologist Richard Lynn
has argued that Asian scores on aptitude tests and IQ tests provide evidence
for a genetic explanation of Asian academic achievement.
Cultural explanations of Asian American scholastic success have received
wider acceptance than genetic explanations. From this point of view, Asian
American families pass on cultural values that stress hard work and educa-
tional excellence. Looking at Vietnamese American children, Nathan Cap-
lan, Marcella H. Choy, and John K. Whitmore maintained that Vietnamese
families passed on cultural values to their children that enabled the children
to do well in school. One difficulty with applying this explanation to Asian
Americans in general is that the different Asian groups come from a variety of
cultural backgrounds.
To address the difficulties raised by both the genetic and cultural explana-
tions, Sue and Okazaki put forward the theory of “relative functionalism” in
their 1990 article. According to this theory, Asian success is to be explained by
blocked mobility: As a result of barriers to upward mobility by other means,
such as social networks, Asians tend to focus on education. Although blocked
mobility may influence the life choices of Asians, it would not account for
trends in other groups that also experience blocked mobility but do not show
the levels of academic performance characteristic of Asians.
Sociologists Min Zhou and Carl L. Bankston III have argued that Asian
American educational success may, to some extent, be a consequence of the
types of social relations found in Asian American communities. They have
claimed that tightly knit ethnic communities, such as Chinatowns or South-
ern California’s Little Saigon, can promote the upward mobility of young
people by subjecting them to the expectations of all community members
and by providing them with encouragement and support from all community
members. This explanation, though, does not tell us why Asian Americans
54
who do not live in ethnic communities may sometimes be high achievers in

school.
The precise causes of Asian American educational achievement, then, re-
main a matter of debate. In all likelihood, some combination of existing theo-
ries may account for the scholastic performance of this group, with some the-
ories applying more to some specific groups than to others.
Further Reading James R. Flynn’s Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond IQ

(Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991) provides an overview of
Asian American academic achievement and provides a useful introduction
for those interested in this subject. In Compelled to Excel: Immigration, Educa-
tion, and Opportunity Among Chinese Americans (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Uni-
versity Press, 2004), Vivian S. Louie focuses on the academic achievements of
Chinese Americans. My Trouble Is English: Asian Students and the American
Dream (Portsmouth, N.H.: Boynton/Cook, 1995) offers insight into the im-
portance of education as a means of upward mobility for Asian American stu-
dents and into the challenges faced by many of these students. Stacey J. Lee’s
Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth
(New York: Teachers College Press, 1996) investigates the motivations and
problems of Asian American students. The educational achievements of chil-
dren of refugees from Southeast Asia are described in Children of the Boat Peo-
ple (Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 1991). In Growing Up
American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to Life in the United States (New York:
Russell Sage, 1998), Min Zhou and Carl L. Bankston III examine the experi-
ences of Vietnamese children in American schools and compare Vietnamese
American students with students of other Asian and non-Asian ethnicities.
For broader studies of Asian American youth, see Asian American Youth: Cul-
ture, Identity, and Ethnicity (New York: Routledge, 2004), edited by Jennifer
Lee and Min Zhou; Stacey J. Lee’s Up Against Whiteness: Race, School, and Immi-
grant Youth (New York: Teachers College Press, 2005); and H. Mark Lai’s Be-
coming Chinese American: A History of Communities and Institutions (Walnut
Creek, Calif.: AltaMira, 2004). For broader perspective on immigrant educa-
tion, see Educating New Americans: Immigrant Lives and Learning (Mahwah,
N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates, 1999), by Donald F. Hones and Cher Shou Cha;
Overlooked and Underserved: Immigrant Students in U.S. Secondary Schools (Wash-
ington, D.C.: Urban Institute, 2000), by Jorge Ruiz de Velasco and Michael
Fix; and Immigrants, Schooling, and Social Mobility: Does Culture Make a Differ-
ence? (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000), edited by Hans Vermeulen and Joel
Perlmann. The latter volume is a collection of papers from a 1996 conference
on culture and worldwide immigration that was held in Amsterdam.
See also Amerasians; Asian American literature; Assimilation theories; Bi-

lingual education; Model minorities.
55
Asian American Legal Defense Fund
Asian American Legal

Defense Fund
Identification: Asian American rights advocacy organization
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants
Significance: The Asian American Legal Defense Fund (AALDF) organiza-

tion formed to defend and promote the legal rights of Asian Americans
through litigation, legal advocacy, community education, leadership de-
velopment, and free legal assistance for low-income and immigrant Asian
Americans.
The Asian American Legal Defense Fund is headquartered in New York City,
and the executive director in 1998 was Margaret Fung, an Asian American
lawyer. The AALDF was organized to help relieve the effects of racial preju-
dice and social discrimination experienced by Asian and Pacific Americans.
Many individuals from the diverse Asian American population have at-
tained middle-class status, and a select few have entered upper-level manage-
ment within major United States corporations. However, in wages and career
advancement, Asian Americans generally lag behind their white counter-
parts. The AALDF addresses these and other grievances by educating Asian
American communities, particularly in the election process of the United
States. Furthermore, to encourage voter participation, the AALDF has fos-
tered the use of bilingual ballots and voter material in the United States.
Asian Americans cast a significant number of votes in key electoral states such
as California and major cities such as New York, Los Angeles, and San Fran-
cisco.
Alvin K. Benson
Further Reading
Chi, Tsung. East Asian Americans and Political Participation: A Reference Hand-
book. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 2005.
Segal, Uma Anand. A Framework for Immigration: Asians in the United States. New
York: Columbia University Press, 2002.
See also Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance; Mexican American Legal
Defense and Education Fund.
56
Asian American literature

Definition: Fiction, essays, and other works written by Americans of Asian
ancestry
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Japanese immi-

grants; Literature
Significance: Asian American literature is usually based on themes that

touch on the authors’ cultural heritages. These works, which first ap-
peared at the end of the nineteenth century, have enabled Asian Ameri-
cans to identify with their own cultural heritage and have helped others to
better understand their culture and experiences.
The first published Asian American writers were two sisters, Sui Sin Far (Edith
Maud Eaton) and Onoto Watanna (Winifred Eaton), the daughters of British
planter Edward Eaton and his Chinese wife, Lotus Blossom. Critics have ac-
cused Sui Sin Far of presenting stereotypical descriptions of the Chinese and
of Chinatown, but in fact, through her collection of short stories Mrs. Spring
Fragrance (1912), she portrayed the discrimination and psychic pain that Chi-
nese immigrants endured. In novels such as Heart of Hyacinth (1904), Onoto
Watanna wrote of love affairs between Asian women and white men in which
her Asian women protagonists always accepted the superiority of their West-
ern lovers. She chose a Japanese-sounding name for her pen name because at
the time, although the American public discriminated against the Japanese,
they viewed them more favorably than the Chinese, stereotyping them as
harder working and more intelligent.
Before World War II, several Asian American writers described their expe-
riences growing up in the United States. One book, Younghill Kang’s East
Goes West (1937), offers a humorous look at the life of a young Korean Ameri-
can and pokes fun at white people’s prejudices.
After World War II, several Japanese Americans published books about the
internment camps and other wartime experiences. In The Two Worlds of Jim
Yoshida (1972), nisei (second-generation Japanese American) Jim Yoshida,
who was in Japan when World War II broke out, relates how he was forced to
serve in the Imperial Army and had to sue to regain U.S. citizenship after the
war. In No-No Boy (1957), John Okada, another nisei, writes about the hysteria
that he experienced in wartime America, and in the award-winning book
Obasan (1981), Joy Kogawa describes her life in a Canadian World War II in-
ternment camp.
The 1960’s and 1970’s During the 1960’s and 1970’s, the Civil Rights and
women’s movements inspired many minority groups to become active politi-
cally and to become more aware of their heritage. This heightened activity
57
and awareness resulted in the publication of more works by Asian Americans,

which helped others to understand and respect them.
In 1972, the first anthology of Asian American literature, Asian-American
Authors, edited by Kai-Yu Hsu and Helen Palubinskas, was published. This an-
thology includes works from only three Asian American groups—Chinese,
Japanese, and Filipino—and gives priority to writers born in America, such as
Frank Chin, Jeffrey Paul Chan, Lawson Fusao Inada, and Shawn Wong. How-
ever, other anthologies soon followed, broadening the spectrum of Asian
American writers to include Americans of Korean, Southeast Asian, and In-
dian ancestry and immigrants such as Chitra Divakaruni.
In 1972, The Chickencoop Chinaman was the first play by an Asian American,
Frank Chin, to receive critical acclaim in New York. Asian American literature
received widespread recognition with the publication in 1976 of Maxine
Hong Kingston’s The Woman Warrior: Memories of a Girlhood Among Ghosts.
Kingston uses ancient Chinese stories to develop her best-selling novel around
the character of Fa Mulan, a woman warrior. This work, like many others by
Asian American writers, incorporates elements of traditional Asian mythol-
ogy and culture. It also illustrates the effect that the Civil Rights and women’s
movements have had on literature produced by members of minority groups.
Common Themes During the 1970’s and 1980’s, various demographic

trends, such as increased immigration from Asia and Mexico, helped the
United States become much more multicultural, and more Asian American
writers felt encouraged to explore Asian themes. Although Asia is a large con-
Frank Chin, the author of The Chickencoop Chinaman, the first play by an Asian American to be
produced. (Corky Lee)
58
tinent with many languages, cultures,

and religions, certain themes and ele-
ments appear to be common in Asian
American literature. These include
the balance between dark and light
and between masculine and femi-
nine; conflicts between ancient heri-
tage, familial obligations, and con-
temporary (often Western) lifestyles;
and the effects of immigration. Af-
ter Kingston’s work became popular,
there was widespread appreciation for
novelists, poets, dramatists, and es-
sayists of Asian ancestry.
Many Asian American women have
written of the cultural conflicts that
women experience when they move Amy Tan, author of The Joy Luck Club. (Robert
from traditional Asian cultures to the Foothorap)
more liberal American culture. Velina
Hasu Houston explores this theme in a 1985 trilogy, Asa ga Kimashita, Ameri-
can Dream, and Tea, whose main characters are Japanese war brides who have
to cross traditional boundaries in order to survive in their new environment.
In Arranged Marriages (1995), Indian-born poet Divakaruni presents images
of the adjustment problems that many women from traditional Indian back-
grounds have in American society.
Asian American writers also have explored familial obligations and ten-
sions. In “Seventeen Syllables” (1994), Hisaye Yamamoto explores the ten-
sions created within Japanese American families when traditional cultural ex-
pectations clash with contemporary lifestyles. In Clay Walls (1986), a novel by
Korean American Kim Ronyoung, the issue of obligation to family is explored
as the wife and mother ruins her eyes doing embroidery work to support her
family after her husband loses all their money gambling.
Some Asian American writers based their stories on the immigrant experi-
ence, as did Wakako Yamauchi in her novel And the Soul Shall Dance (1977)
and Fred Ho in the play Chinaman’s Chance (1987). In Honey Bucket (1979),
Filipino American Mel Escueta explores the issue of identity, attempting to
deal with the guilt he felt after killing Asians during the Vietnam War. Frank
Chin uses stereotypes in the humorous novel Donald Duk (1991), as does Da-
vid Henry Hwang in his Tony Award-winning play M Butterfly (1988).
Perhaps after Kingston, who made the American public aware of Asian
American literature, Chinese American Amy Tan is the writer who has done
the most to popularize the genre. Tan rose to public attention with the publi-
cation of her novel The Joy Luck Club in 1989. She won both the National Book
Award and the Los Angeles Times book award that year. Tan turned her novel
into a screenplay for the 1993 film The Joy Luck Club. She has objected to hav-
59
Asian American stereotypes
ing her work described as Asian American literature because she believes that
the themes in her work, which include male-female relationships and family
obligations, are universal. Nevertheless, Tan’s themes arise from an experi-
ence that may be termed Asian American: the balance between male and fe-
male; clashes between traditional cultures and contemporary lifestyles; strug-
gles with familial obligations; and identity and spirituality issues.
Annita Marie Ward
Further Reading King-kok Cheung edited An Interpretive Companion to

Asian American Literature (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press,
1996). Shirley Geok-lin Lim and Amy Ling edited Reading the Literature of
Asian America (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996). Judith Caesar
explored Asian American themes in “Patriarchy, Imperialism, and Knowl-
edge in The Kitchen God’s Wife ” in North Dakota Quarterly (62, no. 4, 1994-
1995). Asian American literature is discussed in Sucheng Chann’s Asian Amer-
icans: An Interpretive History (Boston: Twayne, 1991). For a discussion of the
treatment of immigration in seventeen novels written for children, see Ruth
McKoy Lowery’s Immigrants in Children’s Literature (New York: P. Lang, 2000).
Broader issues of Asian American identity are covered in Migration and Iden-
tity (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction, 2005), edited by Rina Benmayor and
Andor Skotnes, and Asian American Youth: Culture, Identity, and Ethnicity (New
York: Routledge, 2004), edited by Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou. The six-
volume Asian American Encyclopedia (New York: Marshall Cavendish, 1995),
edited by Franklin Ng, covers all aspects of the Asian American experience,
with many articles on individual writers and related topics.
See also Asian American education; Asian American stereotypes; Asian In-
dian immigrants; Asian Indian immigrants and family customs; Chinese im-
migrants; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Japanese immigrants; Lit-
erature; Southeast Asian immigrants.
Asian American
stereotypes
Definition: North American perceptions and misperceptions about Asian
immigrants and Asian Americans

tion; Japanese immigrants; Nativism and racism; Stereotypes
60
Significance: The hard work and thriftiness that have contributed to the
success of Asian Americans have, at times, caused members of other ethnic
and racial groups to feel threatened. In the nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries, Asian immigrants and their offspring were often called threats
to American society and were viewed by white Americans as a group that
could not be assimilated.
At the beginning of the twenty-first century, millions of Americans of Asian

ancestry lived in the United States; however, some of the old negative stereo-
types and attitudes about them persisted. Many fourth-generation Asian
Americans were identified as Asian (Chinese, Japanese, and so on) rather
than as “American.”
The Chinese, who first immigrated to the United States during the mid-
nineteenth century, were willing to work for low wages, which got them jobs
but also made them the objects of white workers’ jealousy and anger. On the
West Coast, where many of the immigrants had settled, many white workers
blamed Chinese immigrants for their economic woes. They called the Chi-
nese laborers “coolies,” a derogatory term, and claimed that they were of in-
ferior character and could not be assimilated into American culture. This
general climate of blame coupled with the desire of white nativists to limit im-
migration, and many discriminatory laws (such as the 1862 California law, An
Act to Protect Free White Labor Against Competition from Chinese Coolie
Labor) were passed against the Chinese immigrants. Many of these laws were
later employed against immigrants from other Asian countries.
As the Chinese immigrants moved beyond California, white workers in
area after area spoke out against them, claiming that their willingness to work
for meager wages would ruin all Americans’ standard of living. In 1885, in
Rock Springs, Wyoming, a white mob drove Chinese workers out of town and
burned their homes, killing twenty-eight Chinese immigrants in the process.
Transfer of Prejudice Although the Chinese were excluded from immi-

gration by the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, other Asians—Japanese, Koreans,
and Indians—did arrive in the United States. From 1900 to 1910, about
100,000 Japanese arrived on the West Coast. These immigrants tended to be
better educated than the earlier Chinese immigrants had been. Nevertheless,
white Americans on the West Coast, particularly in California, expressed
alarm at their arrival, again claiming that the Japanese could never be assimi-
lated into American society. The press and politicians claimed that a Japanese
invasion was taking place and began to speak of the “yellow peril,” which they
said posed a threat to the American way of life and might result in the United
States being taken over by the Japanese.
In 1924, Congress passed an immigration act that barred nearly all immi-
gration from Asia. Only Filipinos were allowed to immigrate because as citi-
zens of the Philippines, they could become U.S. citizens. However, during the
late 1920’s and during the Depression of the 1930’s, trade unions wanted Fili-
61
pino immigration banned, claiming the Filipino laborers’ willingness to work

cheaply was undercutting the American standard of living. Filipinos were
called a “mongrel stream” that could not be assimilated. Union members
urged the government to ship Filipinos back to the Philippines.
Asians During and After World War II By the time Japan bombed
Pearl Harbor in December, 1941, two generations of Japanese Americans
were living in the United States and Canada: the issei, the original immi-
grants, and their children, the nisei. Some Japanese American families had
been in North America for more than fifty years. Nevertheless, both the Cana-
dian and the United States governments assumed that these Japanese Ameri-
cans would not be loyal to them and placed 120,000 Japanese Americans in
internment camps until the end of World War II.
Immigrants who came to the United States under the quota system, estab-
lished by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 were often profession-
als, tending to be more affluent than earlier immigrants and far less likely to
live in ethnic enclaves such as Chinatowns or Koreatowns. This new group of
professional immigrants and their offspring gave the United States a new
Asian American stereotype—the smart achiever.
In 1965, the quota system was abolished, allowing much more immigration
from Asia. During the mid-1970’s, large numbers of people from Cambodia,
Laos, and Vietnam entered as refugees from the conflict in Southeast Asia.
Many of these people, particularly the Hmong from Laos, were uneducated.
Political leaders began to object to the entrance of refugees, claiming that
their education and skill levels made it difficult for them to assimilate because
they could not learn to read and write in English. It was also claimed that
they took jobs away from Americans. Such stereotyping contributed to the
English-only movement and passage of the 1986 Immigration Reform and
Control Act.
Stereotypes and Resentment In the last decade of the twentieth cen-

tury, household incomes for Asian American families and educational levels
for Asian American adults were generally higher than those of the general
American population. New resentments and stereotypes emerged. In the cit-
ies, this resentment was often directed toward shop owners and landlords of
Asian ancestry. These shop owners were often stereotyped as mercenary and
racist, particularly by some African Americans, such as the Nation of Islam’s
Louis Farrakhan, who likened the affluent Asian Americans to the Jewish
landlords and shop owners of the mid-twentieth century. This resentment
was portrayed in Spike Lee’s movie Do the Right Thing (1989), which foreshad-
owed some of the violence directed toward shop owners of Korean ancestry
during the Los Angeles riots of 1992.
Although people of Asian and Pacific islander heritage represented about
4 percent of the U.S. population in 1999, they made up 8 to 10 percent of
enrollment in Ivy League institutions. Students of Asian heritage made up
62
Asian American women
35 to 40 percent of the student bodies at some universities in the University of

California system, although the percentage of African American and Latino
students fell from the early 1990’s. This situation created resentment against
Asian Americans and placed pressure on young Asian Americans to conform
to the stereotype of Asian Americans as superior students.
Annita Marie Ward
Further Reading The subject of stereotyping is discussed in Asian Ameri-

can Youth: Culture, Identity, and Ethnicity (New York: Routledge, 2004), edited
by Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou. William L. Tung’s The Chinese in America, 1820-
1973 (Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Press, 1974) gives a detailed record and
chronology of Chinese Americans’ experiences from 1820 to 1973. Other
useful books include The Japanese Americans, The Korean Americans, The Chinese
Americans, The Filipino Americans, and The Indo-Chinese Americans, all part of the
Peoples of North America series, edited by Nancy Toff (New York: Chelsea
House Publishers, 1989). Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan served as senior
consulting editor to the series. The six-volume Asian American Encyclopedia
(New York: Marshall Cavendish, 1995), edited by Franklin Ng, covers all as-
pects of Asian American history and life.
See also Arab American stereotypes; Asian American literature; Asian

American women; Asian Indian immigrants and family customs; Chinese im-
migrants; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Irish stereotypes; Japa-
nese immigrants; Southeast Asian immigrants.

Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Demograph-
ics; Families and marriage; Japanese immigrants; Women
Significance: During the 1990’s, Asian American women belonged to the

fastest-growing group of minorities in the United States and Canada.
According to 1999 projections by the U.S. Census, the total number of Asian
Americans and Pacific islanders in the United States more than doubled from
the 1980 census figure of 3.4 million. Despite this rapid population growth,
Asians in the United States, as in Canada, accounted for less than 5 percent of
the population.
Demographics There is growing awareness that Asian Americans come

from many different backgrounds, not simply Chinese and Japanese ones. Al-
63
though the 1990 census reported twenty-eight different Asian American

groups, the focus of much of the literature has been on the eight largest or
more recently controversial and influential groups: Chinese, Filipinos, Kore-
ans, Asian Indians, Japanese, Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Hmong. Approxi-
mately 66 percent of Asian Americans in the United States live in five states:
California, New York, Hawaii, Texas, and Illinois. They also have a tendency
to congregate and concentrate in a few cities: Chicago, Honolulu, Los An-
geles, New York, and San Francisco.
In general, Asian American men had higher rates of graduation from a
high school or higher institution than women in 1990, 82 percent versus 74
percent. Among the various groups of women, however, disparities exist in
terms of completion rates. A high school or higher educational level had
been obtained by 86 percent of Japanese American women but only 19 per-
cent of Hmong American women. Asian American women had a higher labor
force participation rate than all women. In 1990, 60 percent of Asian Ameri-
can women were in the labor force, compared with 57 percent of all women in
the United States.
The diversity in origins and cultural backgrounds of Asian Americans has
made it difficult to speak of an Asian American culture that ties all these
groups together. Nevertheless, common themes can be found in the experi-
ences of women who must struggle constantly with the social burden not only
of their race but also of their gender and their class.
Reasons for Coming to America Historically, it is difficult to speak of

Asian American immigrant women, because there were relatively few of
them. Restrictions on Chinese and Japanese men bringing their wives to
American shores led to the phenomenon of bachelor men and picture
brides. In addition to legal restrictions, cultural deterrents kept Asian women
from venturing abroad: “Respectable” women did not travel far from home;
the only women to do so were maids and prostitutes. Those Asian women who
were able to immigrate labored under hard physical conditions and were of-
ten callously treated. In many cases, however, leaving their home country was
these women’s only alternative to poverty, war, and persecution. Some of the
most recent arrivals to the United States—Southeast Asians from Vietnam,
Cambodia, and Laos—came as refugees of wars in their homelands. Still
other Asian women came in search of adventure and the excitement of living
in a new country, especially those from more affluent families and those who
were well educated.
Yet, no matter what their original status in their native countries, Asian
American women have often encountered a hostile society in the West. Even
those who have been living in the United States or Canada for many years
or decades have not been spared this hostility. Moreover, Asian American
women born in the West are not guaranteed fair treatment. Many immigrant
Asian women are faced with financial hardships, violence, and social ostra-
cism, forcing them to learn survival skills in order to adapt to life in a new
64
country. Some have adjusted quite well to the new environment, while others
have not.
Issues of Concern Asian American women have to some degree helped

perpetuate the myth of Asian Americans as a model minority since, as wives
and mothers, they socialize their families—using a cultural emphasis on edu-
cation, hard work, and thrift—to excel in earnings, education, and occupa-
tional status. Such goals often set Asian Americans apart from other ethnic
groups and can lead to jealousy, resentment, and discrimination.
Despite the hard work and self-sacrifice of many Asian American women,
however, disparity often exists between striving and achievement. Many
newer immigrants must contend with a lack of communication because of
poor English-speaking skills. Asian American women have acquired a reputa-
tion for being conscientious and industrious but docile, compliant, and un-
complaining as well. The necessity of a paycheck relegates some to work as
hotel room cleaners, waitresses, cooks, shop clerks, and electronics assembly-
line workers. Some postpone learning English and as a result may never leave
their entry-level jobs.
In general, Asian American women with college educations are concen-
trated in limited, less prestigious rungs of the professional-managerial class.
Professionally, Japanese women typically become elementary or secondary
school teachers and Filipinas become nurses. In 1980, Asian American
women with four or more years of college were most likely to find jobs in ad-
ministrative support or clerical occupations, such as cashiers, file clerks, of-
fice machine operators, and typists. They are overrepresented in these jobs,
many of which not only have low prestige, low mobility, and low public con-
tact but also offer little or no decision-making authority. Executive manage-
rial status is limited to such occupations as auditors and accountants. Asian
American women are least represented in the more prestigious professions:
physicians, judges, dentists, law professors, and lawyers. Thus, Asian Ameri-
can women in general are poorly represented in higher-level management
and leadership positions and experience the “glass ceiling,” which often pre-
vents women and minorities from rising above a certain job level. The fact
that Asian American women do not reap the income and other benefits one
might expect given their high levels of educational achievement raises ques-
tions about the reasons for such inequality. To what extent is this situation at-
tributable to self-imposed limitations related to cultural modesty, the absence
of certain social and interpersonal skills required for upper-managerial posi-
tions, institutional factors beyond their control, or outright discrimination?
The number of Asian American women turning to mainstream politics,
running for office, or working in politics is increasing. The Civil Rights and
antiwar movements motivated many younger Asian American women to be-
come politically active over issues of discrimination because of race, sex, or
place of origin. During the 1960’s, the first wave of Asian American feminism
focused on empowering these women economically, socially, and politically.
65
The second wave of activism during the 1980’s focused on working with spe-
cific women’s groups as support networks for women of color. Some Asian
American women became involved in assisting the homeless and the poor
(many of whom are elderly immigrants), nuclear disarmament efforts, and
the international issues of freedom in the Philippines and Korea and the sex
trade in Asia.
Many conflicts still need to be resolved. Some tension exists in the Asian
American community between new arrivals and long-term residents or citi-
zens, between native-born and foreign-born members, and between the pro-
fessional and working classes. New arrivals still look to Asia for reference,
while the U.S.-born tend to view the world from an American perspective.
The established working class views the new arrivals as competitors for the
same scarce resources. The established professionals look askance at those
with limited English proficiency and their culturally ill-at-ease immigrant
counterparts. Professionals dissociate themselves from the residents of ethnic
ghettos in Chinatowns, Koreatowns, and Japantowns. Working-class Asian
Americans view the professionals’ tendency to speak for the community with
suspicion.
The chasm between traditional Asian familial values and mainstream val-
ues has brought conflict for Asian American women. In order to be effective,
they must be aggressive, but such an approach is contrary to traditional Asian
feminine values of passivity and subordination. They must be highly visible
and public, contrary to the values of modesty and moderation. Thus, the
Asian American woman pressured to conform to traditional female roles
must overcome a number of barriers in the attempt to adjust to the American
environment.
Cecilia G. Manrique
Further Reading George Anthony Peffer’s If They Don’t Bring Women Here:
Chinese Female Immigration Before Exclusion (Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, 1999) focuses on one major aspect of the experience of female Asian
immigrants. Ethnicities: Children of Immigrants in America (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 2001), edited by Rubén G. Rumbaut and Alejandro
Portes, is a collection of papers on demographic and family issues relating to
immigrants that includes chapters on Filipino and Vietnamese immigrants.
Additional sources of information about Asian Americans include Karin
Aguilar-San Juan’s The State of Asian America (Boston: South End Press, 1994),
Harry H. L. Kitano and Roger Daniels’s Asian Americans: Emerging Minorities
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1988), Tricia Knoll’s Becoming Ameri-
cans: Asian Sojourners, Immigrants, and Refugees in the Western United States (Port-
land: Coast to Coast Books, 1982), Ronald Takaki’s Strangers from a Different
Shore: A History of Asian Americans (Boston: Little, Brown, 1989), and William
Wei’s The Asian American Movement (Philadelphia: Temple University Press,
1993). Making Waves: An Anthology of Writings by and About Asian American
66
Asian Indian immigrants
Women (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989) is a collection of writings by Asian

women edited by the Asian Women United of California. The six-volume
Asian American Encyclopedia (New York: Marshall Cavendish, 1995), edited by
Franklin Ng, covers all aspects of Asian American society.
See also Amerasians; Asian American literature; Asian American stereo-

types; Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Filipino
immigrants; Garment industry; Japanese immigrants; Mail-order brides; Mid-
dle Eastern immigrant families; Page law; Picture brides; Southeast Asian im-
migrants; Thai garment worker enslavement; War brides; Women immi-
grants.

Identification: Immigrants to North America from the South Asian nation
of India
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics
Significance: The more than one million people of Asian Indian origin or
descent living in the United States have contributed significantly to their
adopted nation. The Asian Indian community contains a large proportion
of well-educated, affluent, highly motivated people.
Emigration out of South Asia has been a dominant behavioral pattern since
the Indus Valley civilization (2500-1700 b.c.e.). The impact of merchants and
Buddhist missionaries from India is evident today in Central and East Asia,
where Indian mythology, dance, and theater have had lasting effects. Move-
ment from western India to Africa dates back to the second century c.e.
Small-scale movement changed to mass emigration as Indians provided
cheap labor for British colonies, many becoming indentured servants. The
result was a diaspora of nine million Indians scattered throughout the British
Empire but concentrated in places with labor-intensive economies, especially
plantation systems, such as Mauritius, Fiji, Trinidad, and East Africa. Wide-
scale migration to the United States, Australia, and Canada developed during
the 1960’s, largely because changes in immigration regulations removed ex-
isting racial barriers. The oil-rich Middle East has become a focus for South
Asian immigration since 1970.
Coming to America Initially, Asian Indians came to the United States as

sea captains and traders during the 1790’s, actively pursuing trade between
India and North America. A very few came as indentured laborers. By 1900,
67
Sikh immigrants posing for a group portrait in 1910. (California State Library)
the United States was home to about two thousand Indians, including about
five hundred merchants, several dozen religious teachers, and some medical
professionals. Six thousand Indians entered the United States through the
West Coast between 1907 and 1917, but another three thousand were barred
entry. Many of these immigrants came from Canada, where they had faced
hostilities, only to meet with the same sort of treatment in the United States.
Most immigrants from India during this period originated from Punjab and
were adherents of the Sikh faith.
As Indian immigration increased, anti-Asian violence on the West Coast
began to target Indians. Discriminatory laws were passed, prohibiting them
from owning land and being eligible for U.S. citizenship. In fact, the Immi-
gration Act of 1917 is sometimes referred to as the Indian Exclusion Act. The
hostile environment, along with the Great Depression of the 1930’s, resulted
in several thousand immigrants returning to India. Therefore, in 1940, only
2,405 Asian Indians were living in the United States, mostly around Yuba City,
California.
After World War II, new legislation gave Asian Indians the rights to become
citizens and own land and established a quota of 100 immigrants per year, al-
lowing for family reunification. Between 1948 and 1965, 6,474 Asian Indians
entered the United States as immigrants. The Immigration and Nationality
Act of 1965 removed the national origins clause in U.S. immigration legisla-
tion and gave preference to highly educated and skilled individuals. India
68
had a ready pool of such talent, and the mass movement from India to the
United States began. Sixty-seven percent of the foreign-born Asian Indians in
the United States have advanced degrees, as opposed to only 25 percent of
the American-born. In addition, Asian Indians are highly represented in
managerial positions and as sales/technical/clerical workers and have low
representation in the service, blue-collar categories.
The post-1965 immigrants fall into three categories: initial immigrants,
second-wave immigrants, and sponsored immigrants. The initial immigrants,
who came soon after restrictions were lifted in 1965, are mainly very highly
educated men—doctors, scientists, and academics—who migrated for better
educational and professional opportunities. By the 1990’s, most of these im-
migrants, now middle-aged, were earning more than $100,000 annually.
Their wives typically had little more than a high school education and did not
work outside the home, and their children were in their late teens or early
twenties. This first wave of immigrants were concerned about retirement and
their children. The second-wave immigrants, who came during the 1970’s,
were also highly educated professionals. However, these professionals tended
to be couples, both of whom worked. Their children were mostly college-
bound teenagers, and one of their main concerns was getting their children
through college. The third group of immigrants were those individuals spon-
sored by established family members. They generally were less well educated
and more likely to be running motels, small grocery stores, gas stations, and
other ventures. Their concerns were to establish themselves in a successful
business.
Profile The Asian Indian population in the United States—which con-

sisted of about 7,000 people in 1970—grew to about one million by the late
1990’s, making them the fourth-largest immigrant group. This group reached
815,447 in 1990, a 111 percent rise since 1980, when they numbered 387,000.
The percentage of foreign-born was up from 70 percent in 1980 to 75 percent
in 1990. The community is, on the average, getting younger; the median age
dropped from thirty years in 1980 to twenty-eight years in 1990. However,
over the same period, the size of the elderly population increased. The gen-
der balance has become more equitable as well: In 1966, women made up
34 percent of the population; in 1993, they accounted for 53 percent. During
the mid-1990’s, the mean family income of Asian Indians reached $59,777,
the highest of any Asian group. During the 1980’s, the trend to sponsor rela-
tives was very strong, thus lowering the overall education and income levels of
the community. By 1990, the number of individuals at the poverty level had
doubled, but they still represented about the same percentage of the whole
population of Asian Indians.
The post-1965 immigrants flocked to the major metropolitan areas, where
their skills were most marketable. By the mid-1990’s, 70 percent of the Asian
Indian population lived in eight major industrial-urban states: California, Illi-
nois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. How-
69
ever, the Asian Indians in the United States generally do not live in concen-
trated areas but are dispersed throughout the city. The vast majority speak
English and are familiar with American ways, so they do not need to rely on
their compatriots for help. In addition, because many of them are profession-
als, they are affluent enough to live where they choose.
The educational attainment of the Asian Indian population is very high:
73 percent of those age twenty-five or older have at least a high school educa-
tion. A 1984 study showed that Asian Indians had a mean high school grade-
point average of 3.8 on a scale of 4. Therefore, they form sizable proportions
of the student bodies at the elite colleges in the United States. In 1998, they
held more than five thousand faculty positions in American colleges and uni-
versities.
The Asian Indian population uses lobbying and campaign contributions to
promote its special interests, which range from revisions of immigration pol-
icy to efforts to prevent or minimize Pakistan’s military buildup.
One of the best-known areas of South Asian entrepreneurial behavior is
the hotel and motel business. Hindus from the Gujarat region in India, most
with the surname of Patel, began arriving in California during the late 1940’s.
Indian grocery store in Marysville, California. (California State Library)
70
They bought dilapidated hotels and motels in deteriorating neighborhoods

and, with cheap family labor, turned the businesses into profitable enter-
prises. During the mid-1980’s, the newsstand business in New York City was
dominated by Indian and Pakistani immigrants who controlled 70 percent of
the kiosks. However, ten years later, the Indians and Pakistanis were being re-
placed by immigrants from the Middle East. South Asians have also been
prominently involved in laundries, gift shops, and the garment industry. Dur-
ing the early 1990’s, 40 percent of the gas stations in New York City were
owned by Punjabi Sikh immigrants.
Impact of Emigration on India India has benefited tremendously from

emigration to the United States. Remittances, sent by immigrants to remain-
ing family, have made areas such as Gujarat and Punjab relatively prosperous.
Large amounts of capital from abroad have been invested in high technology,
and new ideas from the United States and elsewhere are also evident. By the
mid-1990’s, many Asian Indians had returned from abroad to set up indus-
tries or work for international companies establishing a presence in India.
The bicultural knowledge and skills of these returnees have contributed to
Hyderabad’s becoming the Silicon Valley of India. However, the impact is not
limited to Hyderabad; it can be seen in Bombay, Calcutta, and Delhi as well as
Punjab’s prosperous agricultural Doab region.
Arthur W. Helweg
Further Reading Arthur W. Helweg and Usha M. Helweg’s An Immigrant

Success Story: East Indians in the United States (Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania Press, 1990) is a comprehensive study of the Asian Indian community
in the United States. Jagat K. Motwani’s America and India in a “Give and Take”
Relationship: Socio-psychology of Asian Indian Immigrants (New York: Center for
Asian, African and Caribbean Studies, 2003) is a broad sociological study of
Asian Indians to the United States. Hugh Tinker’s A New System of Slavery: The
Export of Indian Labour Overseas, 1830-1920 (Oxford, England: Oxford Univer-
sity Press, 1974) and Separate and Unequal: India and the Indians in the British
Commonwealth, 1820-1959 (Delhi: Vikas Publishing, 1976) chronicle South
Asian migration. Bruce La Brack’s The Sikhs of Northern California 1904-1974
(New York: AMS Press, 1988) sets forth the development of the Sikh commu-
nity in California. The six-volume Asian American Encyclopedia (New York:
Marshall Cavendish, 1995), edited by Franklin Ng, offers entries on a wide va-
riety of topics relating to Asian immigrants. Ellen Alexander Conley’s The
Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2004) is a collection of firsthand accounts of immigrants from many nations,
including Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Asian Indian immigrants and family
customs; Coolies; Sikh immigrants.
71
Asian Indian immigrants and family customs

and family customs
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics; Families and mar-
riage; Religion
Significance: Immigrants to the United States from the South Asian nations
of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh have had to struggle to maintain their
cultural identities while striving to integrate successfully into mainstream
American culture.
According to U.S. Census figures, slightly fewer than one million persons im-
migrated to the United States from India (including what is now called Paki-
stan) between 1820 and 2003. During the first three years of the twenty-first
century, Indians continued to enter the United States at the rate of about
60,000 immigrants per year. The 1990 U.S. Census counted 1.4 million Asian
Indians and a half million Pakistanis and Bangladeshis living in the United
States. Even though the United States has far fewer immigrants from the In-
dian subcontinent than from several other Asian and Middle Eastern coun-
tries, the former became the fastest-growing immigrant group during the
1990’s. The Indians and Pakistanis who have migrated to the United States
and Canada since the 1960’s represent a highly professional and educated
class. Some 62 percent of them have earned undergraduate and graduate de-
grees. South Asians are concentrated primarily in several large urban centers,
such as New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Chicago, al-
though sizable numbers also live in smaller cities. Evidence has suggested
that permanent communities of South Asians have established themselves in
several big cities.
Family Size The size of the average East Indian and Pakistani family in the
United States is small: 3.2 people per household. Families are usually nuclear,
with parents and children living by themselves. However, groups of close rela-
tives may live in the same area and maintain frequent contact with one an-
other. Parents of Indian couples living in the United States quite commonly
visit their children for several months, but they face relative isolation because
they lack social contacts with persons with similar backgrounds.
Within families from the Indian subcontinent, husbands have remained
the authority figures even in homes where wives have professional careers.
Wives must often contend with the pressures of the “second shift” and their
husbands’ continuing demands for special privileges. Divorce has continued
to be rare among all groups of South Asians. Only 4.5 percent of East Indian
and Pakistani households lack husbands and only 1.3 percent are headed by
72
unmarried couples. While these immigrants have a higher per-capita income

than other Americans, they consume less than those in the same income
brackets. They put a great premium on savings and investment.
East Indian food consumption has been highly resistant to change. Most
Indian Hindus avoid beef and pork, while Pakistanis avoid pork and alcoholic
beverages. In households with children, American style meals have become
more frequent, but traditional Indian meals predominate.
Community Relations India is a culturally diverse country with sixteen

major languages and several main religions. First-generation immigrants
from the Indian subcontinent maintain the traditional values and rituals
handed down to them as a way of preserving their identity. Most of them par-
ticipate in organizations with others from their places of origin who speak the
same language, practice the same religion, and eat the same foods.
Visiting friends and entertaining guests from similar backgrounds are ma-
jor leisure-time activities among Indians and Pakistanis. Preparing lavish
feasts for guests is a common traditional practice, and anything less is consid-
ered bad manners. Among those who practice Islam, regular Sunday schools
exist in which children are taught to read the Qur$3n and how to pray. Among
Hindus, religious practice is less rigid and the major Hindu festivals are con-
ducted in temples, usually presided over by priests.
Image Not Available
73
Children South Asian children, both boys and girls, are usually indulged
for the first five years of their lives. The age of five marks a transition in their
lives; by then, they are expected to adhere to socially appropriate standards of
behavior and to advance academically. The transition is more abrupt for boys
than for girls. Indian and Pakistani immigrants’ attitudes toward raising chil-
dren have remained traditional.
Rigidly defined sex roles are taught and reinforced by adults. Girls are ex-
pected to become proficient at housework, take care of younger siblings, and
be sensitive to social cues, while boys are expected to be strong and academi-
cally successful. Families from the Indian subcontinent have not emphasized
athletic competence as much as other American families. Such attitudes have
often been a source of conflict for young boys, whose parents have often not
been willing to spend time or money in developing their children’s athletic
capacities to match those of their school peers.
Indian and Pakistani adolescents are expected by their families to excel
in the sciences and enter science careers (preferably high-status and high-
paying ones). Since mainstream American society places great emphasis on
education, there is no conflict in this area. Yet, South Asian immigrants have
not viewed education as the free, individualistic enterprise that the host soci-
ety considers it. Children’s educational achievements are regarded as con-
tributing to families’ social prestige.
Dating and Marriage Children of South Asian immigrants, especially

when they reach adolescence, face immense conflicts between parental val-
ues and peer pressure to conform to American customs, conflicts that have
been especially pronounced in dating and marriage. Dating is usually forbid-
den, and arranged marriages are the preferred norm in most families. Girls
are expected to remain virgins until they are married, and chastity is highly
valued among Indian and Pakistani families when choosing brides for their
sons. Parents consider sexual contact before marriage to be immoral and cor-
rupt. There have been several reported cases in which lovers have eloped,
married secretly, or even committed suicide, because their relationships were
unacceptable to their parents.
Most men and women from the Indian subcontinent prefer to return to
their homelands for arranged marriages. Relatives back home establish ties
with several prospective partners and their families. Eventually, immigrant
sons and daughters go to South Asia for short visits in order to select from
among the chosen candidates and marry. Muslim parents usually tolerate in-
terfaith marriages for boys, since offspring are expected to follow the father’s
faith. Daughters’ choices are more limited, because children of daughters
could lose their Islamic affiliation.
Religion and Religious Holidays When South Asians arrive in the

United States and Canada, their religious attitudes become more lenient.
Most Hindus fervently participate in religious activities, worshiping at home
74
or at temples. Families with children practice their religions more often than
families without children as a way of maintaining their children’s sense of tra-
ditional consciousness.
Hindu and Muslim families celebrate most of their religious holidays as a
way of keeping the heritage alive for their children. At such times, families re-
new social bonds and meet to discuss issues pertinent to their communities.
East Indian children learn forms of classical (Indian) music and dance, and
religious functions are a medium to display children’s talents and skills.
Hindu and Muslim schools have been opened in all areas with significant
South Asian populations. Such schools are open on weekends and in the eve-
nings to teach children basic religious practices.
A principal Hindu holiday is the Diwali, or the festival of lights, which cele-
brates the day Krishna, one of the principal gods in the Indian pantheon,
killed the demon Kamsa. In India, streets and homes are usually lit up with oil
lamps a month before the holiday. The night before the festival, firecrackers
are lit and effigies of the demon Kamsa are burnt on street corners, while peo-
ple sing praises to Krishna. The festivities continue the next day with more
firecrackers, while friends and families exchange sweets and feast together.
Muslims’ main holidays are Ramadan and aftar (breaking the fast at sun-
set). Prayers are held every evening followed by taravih (recital of Qur$3nic
verses). Devout Muslims begin fasting a month before Ramadan. Adults and
children refrain from eating or drinking water from sunrise to sunset. Special
prayers are offered at Eid-ul-Fitr (marking the end of the month of Ramadan)
and Eid-ul-Adha (commemoration of the pilgrimage to Mecca). After prayers,
families often gather together for feasts.
Gowri Parameswaran
Further Reading
Abraham, Margaret. Speaking the Unspeakable: Marital Violence Among South
Asian Immigrants in the United States. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers Univer-
sity Press, 2000.
versity of California Press, 2004.
Khandelwal, Madhulika S. Becoming American, Being Indian: An Immigrant Com-
munity in New York City. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Kurian, George, and Ram Srivastava. Overseas Indians. New Delhi, India: Vi-
king Press, 1993.
Lee, Jennifer, and Min Zhou, eds. Asian American Youth: Culture, Identity, and
Ethnicity. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Motwani, Jagat K. America and India in a “Give and Take” Relationship: Socio-
psychology of Asian Indian Immigrants. New York: Center for Asian, African
and Caribbean Studies, 2003.
Saran, Parmatma. The Asian Indian Experience in the USA. New Delhi, India:
Vikas Publishing House, 1985.
75
Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance
Vaidyanathan, Prabha, and Josephine Naidu. Asian Indians in Western Coun-

tries: Cultural Identity and the Arranged Marriage. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeit-
linger, 1991.
See also Asian American education; Asian American literature; Asian In-
dian immigrants; Coolies; Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha;
Sikh immigrants.
Asian Pacific American

Labor Alliance
Identification: Asian American/Pacific islander advocacy organization
Date: Founded on May 1, 1992
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Civil rights and liberties; Labor
Significance: The Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance formed to address

the needs of a growing Asian and Pacific islander community in the United
States.
On May 1, 1992, the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance (APALA) held its
founding convention in Washington, D.C. That gathering drew five hundred
Asian, American, and Pacific island unionists and laborers from around the
United States, including garment factory workers from New York City, hotel
and restaurant workers from Honolulu, longshore laborers from Seattle,
nurses from San Francisco, and supermarket workers from Los Angeles. The
establishment of APALA was the culmination of several decades of Asian
American unionization activity.
Unionizing Since the mid-1970’s, Asian American labor activists in Califor-

nia had worked to strengthen unionization attempts by holding organiza-
tional meetings in the larger Asian American communities within San Fran-
cisco and Los Angeles. Through the efforts of such neighborhood-based
organizations as the Alliance of Asian Pacific Labor (AAPL), stronger ties be-
tween labor and the community were forged, and Asian union staff members
were united more closely with rank-and-file labor leaders. Those too-localized
efforts of the Alliance of Asian Pacific Labor, however, failed to organize sig-
nificant numbers of Asian American workers. In order to begin unionizing
on the national level, AAPL administrators, led by Art Takei, solicited organi-
zational aid from the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial
Organizations (AFL-CIO), a key U.S. labor collective.
76
Upon the invitation of the AFL-CIO executive board, AAPL vice president
Kent Wong attended the 1989 national AFL-CIO convention in Washington,
D.C., to lobby for the establishment of a national labor organization for
Americans of Asian and Pacific island descent. In addressing Wong’s request,
AFL-CIO president Lane Kirkland acknowledged the local accomplishments
of the AAPL in California and recognized the organizing potential of the
growing Asian American workforce. In 1991, Kirkland appointed a national
Asian Pacific American labor committee. This group of thirty-seven Asian and
American labor activists met for more than a year to create the Asian Pacific
American Labor Alliance. In planning for the 1992 convention, the Asian Pa-
cific American labor committee released a nationwide invitation for Asian,
American, and Pacific island unionists, labor activists, and workers to gather
in Washington, D.C., to take on the responsibility for bridging the gap be-
tween the national labor movement and the Asian Pacific American commu-
nity.
APALA Is Born The response to that invitation exceeded the committee’s

expectations. At the May 1, 1992, convention, more than five hundred dele-
gates participated in adopting an Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance con-
stitution and in setting up a governmental structure with a national head-
quarters in Washington, D.C., and local chapters throughout the United
States. Organized in this manner, APALA could receive recognition and con-
trol from a national administration guided by the AFL-CIO, while still using
its powerful techniques of community organization at the local level.
During the convention, APALA organizers and delegates recognized and
honored Asian Pacific American labor pioneers whose achievements they be-
lieved had melded national and local unionization efforts successfully. Among
them was Philip Vera Cruz, the eighty-seven-year-old former vice president of
the United Farm Workers Union. Vera Cruz had worked since the 1930’s to
create local unions for farmworkers in the southwestern United States, and
continuously lobbied for national support of farmworkers’ unionization.
With an eye toward the future, APALA drafted a Commitment to Orga-
nizing, to Civil Rights, and to Economic Justice, which called for empower-
ment of all Asian and Pacific American workers through unionization on a
national level; it also called for the provision of national support for individ-
ual, local unionization efforts. APALA also promoted the formation of AFL-
CIO legislation that would create jobs, ensure national health insurance, re-
form labor law, and channel financial resources toward education and job
training for Asian and Pacific island immigrants.
Toward that end, the group called for a revision of U.S. governmental poli-
cies toward immigration. APALA’s commitment document supported immi-
gration legislation that would promote family unification and provide im-
proved immigrant access to health, education, and social services. Finally, the
document promoted national government action to prevent workplace dis-
crimination against immigrant laborers; vigorous prosecution for perpetra-
77
tors of racially motivated crimes was strongly supported. To solidify their com-
mitment, APALA delegates passed several resolutions, which they forwarded
to the AFL-CIO leadership. These documents decried the exploitative em-
ployment practices and civil rights violations alleged against several United
States companies.
Convention delegates also participated in workshops that focused on indi-
vidual roles in facilitating multicultural harmony and solidarity, enhancing
Asian American participation in unions, and advancing a national agenda to
support more broadly based civil rights legislation and improved immigra-
tion policies and procedures. From these APALA convention workshops, two
national campaigns were launched. The first involved working with the AFL-
CIO Organizing Institute to recruit a new generation of Asian Pacific Ameri-
can organizers, both at the national and local levels. The second campaign
involved building a civil and immigration rights agenda for Asian Pacific
American workers, based upon APALA’s commitment document and its con-
vention resolutions.
Through the legislative statement of its goals and in lobbying for their sub-
stantive societal implementation, the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance
was the first Asian American labor organization to achieve both national and
local success. Although by the time of the 1992 APALA convention Asian
Americans had been engaged in various forms of unionization activity for
more than 150 years, establishment of APALA within the ranks of the AFL-
CIO provided it with more powerful organizational techniques. The Asian Pa-
cific American Labor Alliance was able to solidly unite Asian Pacific workers,
simultaneously integrating them into the larger U.S. labor movement.
Thomas J. Edward Walker

Cynthia Gwynne Yaudes
Further Reading
Aguilar-San Juan, Karin, ed. The State of Asian America: Activism and Resistance
in the 1990s. Boston: South End Press, 1994. Explores the connection be-
tween race, identity, and empowerment within the workplace and the com-
munity. Covers Euro-American, African American, and Asian American
cultures.
Chang, Edward, and Eui-Young Yu, eds. Multiethnic Coalition Building in Los
Angeles. Los Angeles: California State University Press, 1995. Suggests ways
to build multicultural harmony within the community and the workplace.
Discusses labor union organization among African Americans, Chicanos,
and Asian Americans in California.
book. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 2005. General reference source on
Asian immigrants to the United States.
Friday, Chris. Organizing Asian American Labor. Philadelphia: Temple Univer-
sity Press, 1994. Analyzes the positive impact of Asian Pacific immigration
78
Assimilation theories
upon the formation of industries on the West Coast and in the Pacific
Northwest between 1870 and 1942.
Omatsu, Glenn, and Edna Bonacich. “Asian Pacific American Workers: Con-
temporary Issues in the Labor Movement.” Amerasia Journal 8, no. 1 (1992).
Discusses the advance in status that Asian American workers have achieved
in recent decades; summarizes the political, economic, and social issues
that still impede their progress.
Rosier, Sharolyn. “Solidarity Starts Cycle for APALA.” AFL-CIO News 37, no. 10
(May 11, 1992): 11. Summarizes the AFL-CIO conference report on the es-
tablishment of the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance.
York: Columbia University Press, 2002. Survey of the history and economic
and social conditions of Asian immigrants to the United States, both be-
fore and after the federal immigration reforms of 1965.
Wong, Kent. “Building Unions in Asian Pacific Communities,” Amerasia Jour-
nal 18, no. 3 (1992): 149-154. Assesses the difficulties of Asian American
unionization and gives suggestions for overcoming those problems.
See also Asian American Legal Defense Fund; Asian American women;
Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Garment industry; Hawaiian and Pacific
islander immigrants.
Definition: Theories about the processes by which individuals or groups
take on the culture of the dominant society, including language, values,
and behavior, as well as the processes by which groups are incorporated
into the dominant society
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Families and marriage;

Language; Sociological theories
Significance: Two major models of assimilation are the melting pot theory
and Anglo-conformity.
Assimilationist theories suggest that the outcome of race and ethnic relations
in society is assimilation: the ultimately harmonious blending of differing
ethnic groups into one homogeneous society. A key question that emerges
among assimilationist theorists concerns the basis of that homogeneity. The
melting pot theory holds that distinct groups will each contribute to the
building of a new culture and society that is a melting pot of all their differing
values and behaviors, and the Anglo-conformity theory holds that (in North
79
America) the varying groups will all adopt the values and behaviors of the
dominant, Anglo-Saxon group.
Anglo-conformity According to Milton Gordon in his book Assimilation

in American Life (1964), assimilation involves both acculturation and struc-
tural assimilation, wherein groups are fully incorporated into, and indistin-
guishable from, the larger society. Cultural assimilation, or acculturation,
however, can proceed in either a melting pot pattern or an Anglo-conformity
pattern. Gordon, who attributes the Anglo-conformity thesis to Stewart Cole,
states that this pattern requires that immigrants completely abandon their
cultural heritage in favor of Anglo-Saxon culture. According to Gordon,
those who propose Anglo-conformity as a practical ideal of assimilation view
the maintenance of the English language, institutions, and culture as desir-
able. Such views, in his estimation, are related to nativist programs that pro-
mote the inclusion of those immigrants who are most like the English as well
as to programs that promote the acceptance of any immigrants willing to
acculturate on the basis of Anglo-conformity.
According to Gordon, those espousing the Anglo-conformity ideal cannot
be automatically labeled racist although, as he puts it, all racists in the United
States can be called Anglo-conformists. Furthermore, Anglo-conformists tend
to assume that English ways and institutions are better than others. Even
those who do not support that view argue that these ways and institutions, re-
gardless of their relative merit, do predominate in existing American soci-
ety. Therefore, newcomers must adapt to what is already in place. Anglo-
conformists also assume that once immigrants have acculturated based on
Anglo-conformity, they will be found acceptable and will no longer be the tar-
gets of prejudice and discrimination.
Melting Pot Although the Anglo-conformity ideal has been the prevalent
form of assimilation proposed, the melting pot ideal has also been an impor-
tant and influential aspect of assimilationist thought. Particularly during the
early twentieth century, those who viewed American society as a new experi-
ment in which diverse peoples came together to forge a new culture saw
Americans as a new “race” of people. In this view, the United States was a giant
melting pot that received all immigrants, melting them—and their cultures—
down into one homogeneous and unique group.
The melting pot theory of assimilationist theory was implied by sociologist
Robert Ezra Park’s theory of the race relations cycle, suggested during the
1920’s. In that theory, Park presented the idea that assimilation involves both
cultural and biological processes. In other words, Park conceived of assimila-
tion as accomplished both by the “interpenetration” of distinct cultures, in
which each group takes on some of the other’s culture, and by amalgamation,
or biological mixing through intermarriage and reproduction.
Gordon criticizes melting pot idealists for failing to discuss whether all
groups can contribute equally to the final mixture. Furthermore, since
80
Anglo-Saxons arrived chro-

nologically before other im-
migrants, they were able to
establish the social order
into which newer immi-
grants are expected to
“melt.” Because of this dif-
ference in group influence
on the American character
and society, Gordon claims
that the melting pot ideal
masks the fact that non-
Anglo-Saxons are the ones
expected to change. Fur-
thermore, although some
differences, such as nation-
ality, can be melted down
among whites, other differ-
ences, such as race and re-
ligion, are either not will-
ingly given up or cannot be
melted away. African Ameri-
cans and other people of
color, according to Gordon,
Patriotic poster published during World War I promoting are prevented from melting
the idea of cultural assimilation. (Library of Congress) down by racial discrimina-
tion.
Other Theories and Criticisms In their 1963 book Beyond the Melting
Pot, Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan review the melting pot the-
ory in the light of continuing ethnic diversity and conflict in New York City.
Glazer and Moynihan believed that ethnic groups could join society if they
were willing to change, to acculturate. Unlike Gordon, Glazer and Moynihan
do not view prejudice as the major obstacle to assimilation. They view inter-
nal group weaknesses as the major obstacle; they also cite the lack of a sin-
gle American identity for immigrants to adopt. Glazer and Moynihan think
that ethnic groups develop a new ethnic identity, thus remaining distinct—
neither melted down nor conforming to the Anglo model.
In his 1981 book, The Ethnic Myth, Stephen Steinberg states that the early
rise of nativism in the United States implies that Anglo-conformity domi-
nated assimilationist views. Nativism is a term used for manifestations of the
desire to maintain the given ethnic character of society or particular social in-
stitutions. Generally, nativists see themselves as the real Americans and are
xenophobic, or fearful and hateful of foreigners. Anglo-Saxon settlers wished
to preserve their cultural legacy in the face of massive immigration that labor
81
shortages forced them to tolerate. Perhaps one of the greatest instruments

for Anglo-conformity has been the centralized system of public education
that was developed in the United States. Immigrants were and are taught En-
glish language skills, as well as citizenship, and are thus Americanized. Ac-
cording to Gordon, other forms of Anglo-conformity assimilation include po-
litical movements by nativists to exclude “foreigners” from social institutions,
favoring immigration only by people similar in background and culture to
Anglo-Saxons, and basing social inclusion on the adoption of Anglo-Saxon
culture by immigrants.
Park, who supported the melting pot theory, held that the melting pot
would emerge through amalgamation—accomplished through intermar-
riage across lines of ethnicity. Intermarriage then becomes an important
measure of the extent to which groups are merging into one homogeneous
group. Studies of intermarriage reveal that ethnic groups, in particular, are
marrying across group lines, though not always across religious or racial lines.
For example, intermarriage has increased substantially between Jews and
non-Jews, although in-marriage is still strong for Italian Americans and Irish
Americans. Intermarriage still tends to be culturally prohibited across racial
lines, reflecting important differences between race and ethnicity that melt-
ing pot theorists tended to downplay in their analyses.
Assimilationist theorists generally have not distinguished race from ethnic-
ity. They have not ignored the significant differences between the levels of as-
similation of white ethnic groups and groups of other races; they explain
them either as a product of the greater prejudice held against people who
look different or as a product of the failure of nonwhite minorities to con-
form to and embrace the dominant culture. Assimilationist theorists view
prejudice as the product of the differences that minority group members
present to the dominant society. As group members acculturate, these differ-
ences diminish, and the people are accepted by the dominant society. They
then no longer experience discrimination.
Sharon Elise
Further Reading
Baghramian, Maria, and Attracta Ingram, eds. Pluralism: The Philosophy and
Politics of Diversity. New York: Routledge, 2000. Collection of scholarly dis-
cussions of issues relating to assimilation and pluralism.
Barone, Michael. The New Americans: How the Melting Pot Can Work Again.
Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2001. Reconsideration of the melting pot the-
ory in the context of early twenty-first century America.
Bischoff, Henry. Immigration Issues. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002.
Collection of balanced discussions about the most important and most
controversial issues relating to immigration, including assimilation.
82
Cook, Terrence E. Separation, Assimilation, or Accommodation: Contrasting Eth-

nic Minority Policies. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003. Sociological study of
the dynamics of power relationships among different ethnic groups.
Feagin, Joe R., and Clairece Booher Feagin. Racial and Ethnic Relations. 4th ed.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1993. Introductory text in the sociol-
ogy of race relations that examines sociological theories against the back-
ground of extensive case history of both white ethnic groups and ethnic
groups of other races.
Foner, Nancy, Rubén G. Rumbaut, and Steven J. Gold, eds. Immigration Re-
search for a New Century: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 2000. Collection of papers on immigration from a conference
held at Columbia University in June, 1998. Among the many topics cov-
ered are race, government policy, sociological theories, naturalization,
and undocumented workers.
Glazer, Nathan, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Beyond the Melting Pot. 2d ed.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1970. Controversial book that presents stud-
ies of African Americans, Jews, Puerto Ricans, Italians, and Irish Americans
in New York to re-examine the melting pot thesis.
Gordon, Milton. Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1964. Presents the author’s theory of assimilation, with chapters de-
voted to the Anglo-conformity model and the melting pot model.
Houle, Michelle E., ed. Immigration. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Greenhaven
Press/Thomson/Gale, 2004. Collection of speeches on U.S. immigration
policies by such historical figures as Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin
D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. Includes a section on as-
similation.
Minority.” Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003. Collection of essays on a wide
variety of topics relating to cultural assimilation and the notion of “model
minorities,” with particular attention to immigrant communities in Japan
and the United States.
Press of America, 2002. Survey of the cultural adjustments through which
new immigrants to the United States must go.
Vermeulen, Hans, and Joel Perlmann, eds. Immigrants, Schooling, and Social
Mobility: Does Culture Make a Difference? New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000.
Collected papers from a 1996 conference on culture and worldwide immi-
gration that was held in Amsterdam.
See also British as dominant group; Cultural pluralism; Ethnic enclaves;

European immigrant literature; Generational acculturation; History of U.S.
immigration; Melting pot; Migrant superordination; Model minorities.
83
Au pairs
Au pairs
Definition: Immigrants—usually young Europeans—who do domestic work
for families in exchange for room and board and opportunities to learn
English
Immigration issues: Illegal immigration; Labor; Women
Significance: Au pairs help satisfy working parents’ need to find care for
their children at a reasonable cost, while making it easier for young for-
eigners to come to the United States.
During the late twentieth century, many American families with parents who
worked outside their homes felt a pressing need for household help. For the
wealthy, such services were often provided by children’s nurses or nannies;
however, a less costly alternative was au pairs, usually young foreign visitors
who were treated as family members. Au pairs performed light domestic du-
ties, including child care, cleaning, cooking, and laundering, in exchange for
room and board, weekly stipends, and opportunities to learn the language of
the families with whom they stayed.
Prior to 1986 it was a fairly common practice to hire illegal immigrants as
au pairs, but the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 increased the
penalties that could be imposed on employers of such workers. Au pairs have
continued to play an important role in the growth and development of chil-
dren under their care and in helping to foster and maintain family unity,
while giving young foreigners opportunities to come to North America.
Alvin K. Benson
Further Reading
Bloodgood, Chandra. Becoming an Au Pair: Working as a Live-in Nanny. Port Or-
chard, Wash.: Windstorm Creative, 2005.
Miller, Cindy F., and Wendy J. Slossburg. Au Pair American Style. Bethesda,
Md.: National Press, 1986.
See also Indentured servitude; Mail-order brides; Women immigrants.
84
Bilingual education
Bilingual education
Definition: Education systems that involve the use of minority and majority
languages for teaching schoolchildren whose primary language is not En-
glish
Immigration issues: Education; Language
Significance: Bilingual education, which combines language learning with

teaching culture in meeting the educational goals of different minority
groups, has become a controversial and highly politicized subject that is
closely tied to immigration issues.
Bilingual education in the United States has had a turbulent history. On

June 2, 1998, voters in California ended the thirty-year-old tradition of bilin-
gual education in California public schools by passing Proposition 227, which
gives immigrant children only one year to learn English before they enroll in
regular classes. The passage of this initiative and the courts’ response to the
new law (which almost immediately became subject to court litigation) were
seen as a critical test of the U.S. commitment to bilingual education; Califor-
nia, after all, represented the largest school system in the nation with the larg-
est student population enrolled in bilingual classes. If California eliminated
bilingual education, many other school systems in other states were hoping
either to impose severe restrictions on bilingual instruction or to eliminate it
totally by passing an English-only policy. In contrast, the Coral Way School in
Miami, which became the first successful bilingual school in the United States
in 1963, continued to offer a strong commitment to bilingual education. Al-
though support was eroding in other parts of the United States, Miami sup-
port for bilingualism was gaining strength. These examples best represent
the roller-coaster history of bilingual education.
Over the years, bilingual education has experienced a series of ups and
downs as various immigrant groups have arrived in the United States. One of
bilingual education’s most significant moments was the passage of the Bilin-
gual Education Act in 1968. The act promoted bilingualism as a way to ad-
dress the educational needs of children whose primary language is not En-
glish. In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in Lau v. Nichols that a school district
was required to provide bilingual education. Subsequent court decisions fur-
ther highlighted the need for solid bilingual education programs as a means
of providing equal access to education. However, many schools did not com-
ply with this ruling. Bilingual education underwent a series of setbacks dur-
ing the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush. By 1990, the tide
was turning in favor of the English-only campaigns. The passing of Proposi-
tion 227 in California was intended to deliver the most severe blow yet to bi-
lingual education in the United States.
85
Bilingual education
Maintenance vs. Transitional Bilingualism The main problem that

bilingual education attempts to address is how to respond to the need of mi-
nority children to learn the majority language, English. According to the U.S.
Department of Education, more than five million children in public schools
have limited English proficiency (LEP). If these children cannot understand
what the teacher is saying, they obviously cannot learn academic subjects
such as math, science, and reading. If their study of academic subjects is post-
poned until they are proficient in English, their progress in these subjects is
seriously hampered. If the “sink-or-swim” approach is used and children are
taught entirely in English, their performance in academic subjects will deteri-
orate. Bilingual education solves this problem by teaching academic subjects
to LEP children in their native languages while teaching them English. Fur-
thermore, studies show that improving cognitive skills in native languages
further facilitates the learning of academic subjects. However, studies such as
those by Jim Cummins show that at least four to six years of instruction in na-
tive languages (called Late-Exit to English) are needed before optimal results
are registered both on proficiency in English and on other subjects in terms
of achieving or exceeding national norms.
Most bilingual programs in the United States can best be characterized as
transitional bilingual programs because they encourage the maintenance of
Classroom made up primarily of European immigrants in a Boston school in 1909. The question of
how best to teach English to immigrant children is an old one, but attempts at bilingual education
have generally been made more often in schools in which a single second language predomi-
nates than in schools whose pupils speak many different languages. (Library of Congress)
86
Bilingual education
the native language as a transition toward the learning of English. This pro-
cess is called subtractive bilingualism. In the first stage, students are monolin-
gual, learning only in their native language. Then students enter a stage of
transitional bilingualism, in which they are functional in both their native
language and English. Finally, they become monolingual in English.
Maintenance programs are additive bilingual programs that maintain the
students’ native language as they learn English. At the beginning, students
are monolingual, speaking only their native language, then they begin to be-
come bilingual, adding English to their native language. In the end, the stu-
dents become fully functional in English yet maintain their native language.
Proponents of additive bilingual programs claim that maintenance of the
student’s native language is critical for the child’s linguistic and cognitive
growth, school performance, psychological security, ethnic and cultural iden-
tity, self-esteem, and many other positive personality and intellectual charac-
teristics. The supporters of transitional bilingual programs claim that these
programs avoid unnecessary linguistic duality and confusion, which some-
times cause children to be unable to function well in either language; im-
prove students’ performance in school; and minimize social, ethnic, and po-
litical divisions. The latter view derives support from long-term bilingual
programs that have been found to lack effectiveness. For example, in 1997,
only 6.7 percent of LEP children moved into regular classes in California as
compared with 15 percent in 1982. Other states exhibit the same trend, point-
ing to the low success rate of long-term bilingual programs aimed at main-
taining both languages. Advocates of maintenance bilingual programs at-
tribute these low success rates to factors that are not intrinsic to bilingual
education, such as a lack of funding, trained teachers, and federal/state com-
mitment to bilingual education; poorly structured classrooms (grouping
large numbers of students with diverse and unrelated native languages); and
not enough adequate pedagogical material. According to Jim Lyons, execu-
tive director of the National Association for Bilingual Education, a large num-
ber of bilingual programs are “not worthy of the name.” Programs such as the
Eastman school model (pioneered by Steven Krashen and Cummins), which
is widely used in Los Angeles schools, have shown themselves to be effective.
The model is notable for its effective use of the results of basic research in re-
cent theories of language acquisition and its long-term bilingual and bicul-
tural basis.
Alternatives to Bilingual Education Alternatives to bilingual pro-

grams generally take the shape of programs to teach children English. In-
stead of simply placing LEP children in ordinary classes, children are placed
in English as a second language (ESL) or English language development
(ELD) programs. The ELD approach follows a strategy that encourages stu-
dents to first comprehend and then speak English. The lessons are delivered
in a low-anxiety, small-group, and language-conducive environment. Stu-
dents’ errors are tolerated, and the focus is on the acquisition of interactive
87
Bilingual education
Milestones in Bilingual Education

Period/Year Event Impact
1694-mid Vernacular German-, French-, and Spanish-speaking
nineteenth education schools schools in the East and South are common
century in spite of periodical attempts to replace
German/Spanish with English.
1828 U.S.-Cherokee Treaty recognizes language rights of the
Treaty Cherokee tribe.
1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Language rights of the new Spanish-
Hidalgo speaking citizens of the United States are
“guaranteed”—but rarely respected.
1868 Indian Peace Group concludes: “Their [native Indian]
Commission barbarous dialects should be blotted out
and the English language substituted.”
1889 American Protective Declares that English should be the sole
Association proposal language of instruction in all public and
private schools.
1898 Spanish-American English becomes the medium of
War instruction in the new colonies, Puerto
Rico, and Hawaii.
1917 World War II— This bill, the product of anti-German
Cox’s bill sentiment, bans German from Ohio’s
elementary schools.
1930’s Decline of non- Bilingual education is wiped out, except in
English languages parochial schools in rural areas of the
Midwest.
1964 Civil Rights Act Language provision of this act becomes
the legal basis for bilingual education.
1968 Bilingual Education This act addresses the needs of students
Act with limited English skills, promoting
bilingualism and encouraging ways to help
speed up children’s transition to English.
1974 Lau v. Nichols Establishes the principle that children
decision have a right to instruction in a language
that they can understand.
1998 Proposition 227 California voters pass Proposition 227,
which gives immigrant children only one
year to learn English before entering
regular classes. Other school systems in
other states watch this development with
interest.
88
Bilingual education
communicative skills. The teacher provides what is termed “comprehensible

input” (expressions in English that make sense to children) by means of role-
playing, modeling, and pictures. After about six to twelve months of ELD in-
struction, a shift is made to “sheltered English” instruction, which includes
simplified language with common vocabulary, frequent paraphrasing, clarifi-
cation, comprehension checks, and the use of simple sentence structures to
teach context-rich subjects such as art and music.
Researchers Keith A. Baker and Adriana A. de Kanter suggest the struc-
tured immersion program modeled after the St. Lambert French immersion
program in Quebec as an alternative to bilingual education programs. How-
ever, the success of the Canadian program is attributed to community and
parent support; the fact that language-majority students (English speakers)
were immersed into a minority language (French); and that the program
goals included additive bilingualism. Similarly structured immersion pro-
grams failed in the United States because they involved language-minority
children, neglected their native language, and were based on subtractive bi-
lingualism.
As political battles are being waged all over the United States concerning
bilingual education, the nation’s schools are still being overwhelmed by
never-ending waves of LEP children. However, the question of how best to
teach these children English remains unanswered.
Tej K. Bhatia
Further Reading Up-to-date studies of issues relating to bilingualism in-

clude Language and Cultural Diversity in U.S. Schools: Democratic Principles in Ac-
tion (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2005), edited by Terry A. Osborn; Charmian
Kenner’s Becoming Biliterate: Young Children Learning Different Writing Systems
(Sterling, Va.: Trentham Books, 2004); and Terrence G. Wiley’s Literacy and
Language Diversity in the United States (2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Center for Ap-
plied Linguistics, 2005). James Crawford’s Bilingual Education: History, Politics,
Theory, and Practice (Trenton, N.J.: Crane, 1989) and Kenji Hakuta’s Mirror of
Language: The Debate on Bilingualism (New York: Basic Books, 1986) are two
classic studies on the various facets (historical, political, and educational) of
bilingual education. For the latest trends in bilingual education, see Duane E.
Campbell’s Choosing Democracy: A Practical Guide to Multicultural Education
(Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1996). James Cummins’s Empowering
Language Minority Students (Sacramento: California Association for Bilingual
Education, 1989) deals with educational and other issues pertaining to mi-
norities at risk. A detailed state-of-the-art treatment of language acquisition is
presented in two volumes, Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (1996) and
Handbook of Child Language Acquisition (1998), edited by William C. Ritchie
and Tej K. Bhatia (San Diego: Academic Press). These two volumes contain
several chapters dealing with the phenomenon of bilingualism, bilingual lan-
guage acquisition, and bilingual education.
89
Bilingual Education Act of 1968
See also Anglo-conformity; Asian American Legal Defense Fund; Bilin-

gual Education Act of 1968; Cultural pluralism; English-only and official En-
glish movements; Generational acculturation; Lau v. Nichols; Proposition 227.
Bilingual Education Act

of 1968
The Law: Federal legislation that authorized federal assistance to schoolchil-
dren of limited English-speaking ability
Date: 1968
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Cuban immigrants; Educa-

tion; Language; Laws and treaties
Significance: In creating the Bilingual Education Act, Congress attempted

to bend the will of the many to meet the needs of the few and provide a
chance for the children of all people to share in the American Dream.
Although hailed as the world’s melting pot, for most of its history the United
States has been a nation of one language and culture. This conformist ethic
maintained that as immigrants came to the United States they should give up
their native customs and languages and assimilate as quickly as possible into
the Anglo-American mainstream. Underlying this drive toward conformity
was the unwritten rule in both Anglo and immigrant communities that to suc-
ceed, immigrants must bend to American culture instead of expecting Ameri-
can culture to bend to them. Although ethnic neighborhoods and enclaves
did exist and in some areas even flourished, the mainstream of American soci-
ety was one of English-derived Anglo tradition.
Bilingual Education: Theory vs. Reality It was believed by many edu-

cators that the best way to prepare the children of immigrant parents for life
in American culture was to immerse them in the English language and cus-
toms as quickly as possible. In this process of immersion, it was thought that
the children who could learn would; those who could not were obviously of
inferior mental abilities and therefore were not capable of obtaining the
American Dream. This philosophy, besides confirming the prevailing notion
of Anglo-American superiority, also fit well with the notion of social Darwin-
ism popular during the late nineteenth century.
The reality for most immigrant children during the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries was that they were much more likely to sink than
swim. In 1908, 13 percent of immigrant children enrolled in New York City
90
schools at age twelve were likely to go on to high school, as opposed to 32 per-

cent of the native-born. This trend was mirrored across the country, as non-
English-speaking immigrant children, not understanding the language of in-
struction, fell further and further behind their native-born classmates.
While English dominance remained the rule across most of the United
States in the years preceding World War I, certain areas of the country were
forced by circumstance to provide limited native-language instruction. These
areas included parts of Louisiana, where French was the language of the ma-
jority of the population, and the Northeast and Midwest, where there were
substantial German American populations. These areas, as well as several Na-
tive American reservations, provided instruction in the language of the non-
English-speaking population. With the advent of World War I, an intense
wave of nationalism swept the country. It reinforced the negative reaction of
many Americans to the large wave of immigration that had begun during the
1890’s. Among the first casualties of this increase in “nativism” were programs
for instructing schoolchildren in any language other than English.
State Legislation By 1925, thirty-seven states had passed laws requiring

instruction in English, regardless of what was the dominant culture of the re-
gion. This trend continued into the 1950’s. By the end of that decade, how-
ever, there were growing indications that more and more students with lim-
ited English proficiency were falling through the cracks of the educational
system and thereby becoming trapped in language-induced poverty and de-
spair. For those children who attempted to stay in school, the outcome was of-
ten little better than if they had dropped out. During this period, the pre-
ferred method of dealing with those who spoke little or no English was to
tag them as mentally retarded or learning impaired. Once so characterized,
these children were placed in remedial instruction programs, where they were
constantly reminded of how different they were from their native, English-
speaking classmates.
For those who managed to avoid being tagged as retarded, the most likely
educational track was vocational, foreclosing access to higher-paying profes-
sional occupations. Demographics began to force a change in the attitudes of
many public officials by the early 1960’s. As immigrant populations began to
flood into the schools of the South, districts were forced to consider alterna-
tive means of instruction. The first to do so was Coral Way, Florida.
After the Cuban revolution of 1959, waves of Cuban refugees entered
South Florida. Responding to the demand for quality bilingual instruction,
the Coral Way school district implemented the first state-supported program
to instruct students in their native language, thereby easing their transition to
English. Since there was no U.S. precedent for the school district to draw
upon, it turned to the American schools in Ecuador and Guatemala, which
sought to develop fluency in both languages. The bilingual program was im-
plemented for the first three grades of Coral Way schools and provided all stu-
dents, Anglo and Cuban, instruction in both Spanish and English. Given the
91
middle- to upper-class background of much of the early Cuban immigrant

population, there was no need for a compensatory component to the pro-
gram to care for general language or learning deficiencies. With the success
of the Coral Way project, the precedent for state and local government in-
volvement in language assistance was set.
The Federal Government Becomes Involved By the mid-1960’s, there

were indications that the federal government was ready to become involved
as well. As the national government began to investigate poverty and discrimi-
nation, several pieces of legislation were enacted that paved the way for the
eventual adoption of the Bilingual Education Act. Of these, the two most im-
portant were the 1964 Civil Rights Act, specifically Title VI barring discrimi-
nation in education, and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, which established the precedent for federal involvement in aid to im-
poverished and educationally deprived students.
In 1968, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act would be the vehi-
cle by which Congress funded bilingual education. By the time the Ninetieth
Congress opened in 1967, bilingual education had become a popular topic.
More than thirty-five bills on the subject were introduced during the session,
as many members of Congress became aware of the injustice of forcing immi-
grant children to struggle to learn lessons in what was to them a foreign lan-
guage.
Of these bills, Senate Bill 428, introduced by Ralph W. Yarborough, was
typical. It proposed amending the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
to create a new section, Title VII, providing bilingual education for those stu-
dents speaking Spanish at birth or whose parents had originated in either
Mexico or Puerto Rico. The Yarborough bill thus was not universal in scope
but rather a concession to the Hispanic community—by far the nation’s larg-
est non-English-speaking minority and a group that was increasingly vocal.
Mexican Americans were of growing importance in Yarborough’s home state
of Texas. Yarborough’s approach was immediately attacked by both the White
House and members of Congress. President Lyndon B. Johnson had por-
trayed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as the hallmark of his
war on poverty and saw no need to modify it.
Commissioner of Education Harold Howe II formalized this position when
he proposed that instead of creating a new Title VII, additional monies could
be appropriated under the existing Title I of the act. This section earmarked
funds for language programs in economically impoverished areas, although
it did not require schools to use languages other than English in order to re-
ceive funding. In Congress, numerous members rose in opposition to the
bill’s limitation of bilingual education to one ethnic group, no matter how
potentially powerful that group might be. It was argued that targeting one
group for aid would unconstitutionally deny equal protection to myriad
other ethnic groups and language minorities scattered across the country.
Representative James H. Scheuer of New York proposed a compromise
92
that would provide funding for

bilingual education to school dis-
tricts with substantial non-English-
speaking populations residing in
economically disadvantaged areas.
To receive funding, districts would
be required to provide instruction
in a student’s native tongue until
the child could demonstrate com-
petence in English. Although Sen-
ator Yarborough resisted the ex-
pansion of the act’s scope, he
relented when the White House
gave its grudging approval. With
this political hurdle cleared, Pres-
ident Johnson signed the amend-
ments adding Title VII to the Ele-
mentary and Secondary Education
Act on January 2, 1968.
Although no money was appro- President Lyndon B . Johnson saw no need to amend
priated for 1968, $7.5 million was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
appropriated for 1969, enough to 1965 but nevertheless eventually signed the Bilin-
fund bilingual education for some gual Education Act. (Lyndon B . Johnson Library/
twenty-seven thousand students. Yoichi R. Okamoto)
Accompanying the political bat-
tle over the number of language groups to be served was a deeper philosophi-
cal struggle concerning the goals of bilingual education. Congress knew
that it had to do something, but the “how” of bilingual education was unclear.
The Bilingual Education Act created a framework for federal aid to schools
with students of limited English ability but said little about whether the goal
of the program should be a rapid transition to instruction in English or a
slower approach allowing the maintenance of the child’s native language and
customs.
The act’s only significant stipulation was that to obtain federal aid a district
had to use native languages in instruction. This lack of clarity contributed to
the creation of an ideological conflict that lasted into the twenty-first century
and brought the overall impact and effectiveness of bilingual education into
question.
Impact of Event The federal government’s commitment to bilingual edu-

cation grew into the hundreds of millions of dollars by the mid-1970’s.
Reauthorizations in 1972 and 1974 broadened the scope of the legislation
and provided additional programs. These efforts were aided by both the fed-
eral courts and the Office of Civil Rights (then a part of the Department of
Health, Education and Welfare).
93
L AU V. NICHOLS and Anglo Backlash In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in

Lau v. Nichols that school districts with a substantial number of non-English-
speaking students must take steps to overcome language difficulties. This
provided the Office of Civil Rights with the backing needed to force recalci-
trant school districts to initiate bilingual education plans. These Lau plans
greatly expanded the number of native-language instructional programs
available across the country. They also set standards for when students quali-
fied for inclusion in a program and when they could be allowed (or forced) to
exit. During this period, test scores repeatedly showed that students exiting
from well-designed and well-implemented programs consistently performed
at or above grade level and thus were on a par with their native English-
speaking classmates.
By the 1980’s, the ambiguities in the goals of bilingual education had be-
gun to engender resentment in parts of the Anglo population. Some believed
that the aim of bilingual education was not to speed immigrants into the
mainstream but rather to maintain their culture through state-sponsored eth-
nic programs. Fueling this attack were several studies showing that some bi-
lingual programs were allowing students to remain in bilingual classes longer
than the three-year maximum and were not teaching them sufficient English
to function in mainstream classrooms. With the election of Ronald Reagan to
the presidency, the federal government began to retreat from aggressively
promoting native-language instruction and instead encouraged districts to
choose their own methods to develop capability in English.
Federal Reauthorization The 1984 reauthorization for the first time

saw federal monies available for methods of instruction that did not utilize a
student’s native tongue but rather allowed for English immersion or submer-
sion. Although this funding was limited in 1984, it was expanded in 1988. This
change was amplified by a major retreat on the part of the Office of Civil
Rights in its enforcement of Lau remedies. Under the Reagan administra-
tion, a school district was one-ninth as likely to be reviewed by the Office of
Civil Rights as under the administrations of either Gerald Ford or Jimmy
Carter. This change in government philosophy, while not signaling the end of
bilingual education, did have a significant impact.
By the mid-1980’s, several studies, including an influential one by the Gen-
eral Accounting Office, had shown that while there were problems in the
implementation of some programs, the philosophy of instruction in stu-
dents’ native languages during the transition to English not only worked but
allowed students to obtain grade-level standing much more quickly than
English-only programs. Correspondingly, as the English-dominant approach
became the program of choice for many districts, the performance of limited-
English students once again declined. As with any attempt to expand the
rights of the few, the Bilingual Education Act was politically charged and buf-
feted by ideological storms. What was indisputable, however, was that the leap
of faith that Congress undertook in 1968 was aimed at the future—a future in
94
which the dominant Anglo-American culture would be forced to adapt to an

increasingly diverse population.
Christopher H. Efird
Further Reading
August, Diane, and Eugene E. Garcia. Minority Education in the United States:
Research, Policy, and Practice. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1988. A
fairly analytical work, this book provides a thorough discussion of the theo-
retical groundings of bilingual education as well as federal and state at-
tempts to implement these programs. Well-indexed and referenced. In-
cludes a particularly well-written chapter on specific types of bilingual
education programs.
Crawford, James. Bilingual Education: History, Politics, Theory, and Practice.
Trenton, N.J.: Crane Publishing, 1989. Written from a lay perspective, this
book presents a good summary of the competing educational and political
philosophies that characterize the debate over bilingual education. Al-
though somewhat unsophisticated, the book touches on all aspects of bi-
lingual education: political, practical, and philosophical.
Grant, Joseph H., and Ross Goldsmith. Bilingual Education and Federal Law: An
Overview. Austin, Tex.: Dissemination and Assessment Center for Bilingual
Education, 1979. As its name implies, this book summarizes and comments
on the various federal laws pertaining to bilingual education. A particular
strength is the author’s excellent weaving together of the often conflicting
priorities of the Congress, the president, and the courts to show how bilin-
gual education has been affected.
Kenner, Charmian. Becoming Biliterate: Young Children Learning Different Writ-
ing Systems. Sterling, Va.: Trentham Books, 2004. Study of the technical as-
pects of bilingual education.
Leibowitz, Arnold H. The Bilingual Education Act: A Legislative Analysis. Ross-
lyn, Va.: InterAmerica Research Associates, National Clearing House for
Bilingual Education, 1980. Provides a compact history both of the original
1968 amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that
created the Title VII bilingual provisions and of the 1974 reauthorization.
The discussions of the statutory provisions of each are thorough, but there
is little discussion of impacts.
Osborn, Terry A., ed. Language and Cultural Diversity in U.S. Schools: Democratic
Principles in Action. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2005. Consideration of bilin-
gualism in the context of the role of multiculturalism and education.
Porter, Rosalie Pedalino. Forked Tongue: The Politics of Bilingual Education. New
York: Basic Books, 1990. A fascinating presentation of the arguments op-
posed to bilingual education. Using both theoretical discussions and his-
torical examples drawn from twenty years of bilingual practice, the author
builds the argument that bilingual education has failed both the students
it is supposed to help and the society that is paying for it.
95
Border Patrol, U.S.
Sandoval-Martinez, Steven. How Much Bilingual Education? Educational vs. Leg-

islative Considerations. Los Alamitos, Calif.: National Center for Bilingual
Research, 1984. A very short work, this paper is nevertheless useful for its
discussion of the implications of legislative standards on bilingual pro-
gram exit criteria. In looking at these criteria, the author demonstrates
how standardized exit requirements are incongruent with the educational
needs of most students.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. “Multilingualism and the Education of Minority Stu-
dents.” In Minority Education: From Shame to Struggle, edited by T. Skutnabb-
Kangas and J. Cummins. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters, 1988. In
keeping with the theme of the book, this chapter looks beyond the minor-
ity education problems in the United States and takes a more global per-
spective. The author investigates the impact that a multilingual population
has on a society and the demands this imposes on the educational system
to integrate language minorities into the mainstream.
Stein, Colman Brez, Jr. Sink or Swim: The Politics of Bilingual Education. New
York: Praeger, 1986. Provides a good history of bilingual education policy
from its modern inception in Coral Way, Florida, through the 1984 reau-
thorization. Contains a substantial discussion of state initiatives and how
they worked to support or undermine federal programs.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005. Comprehensive
study of language and literacy in American education.
See also Bilingual education; English-only and official English movements;

Lau v. Nichols; Proposition 227.
Border Patrol, U.S.

Identification: Units of the federal agency that oversee the coastal and land
boundaries of the United States
Date: Established in May, 1924
Place: Washington, D.C.
Immigration issues: Border control; Illegal immigration; Latino immigrants;

Law enforcement; Mexican immigrants
Significance: Congress established the U.S. Border Patrol to prevent undoc-

umented immigrants from Latin America and Canada from entering the
United States. As a federal law-enforcement body under the aegis of the
Department of Homeland Security since 2003, the U.S. Customs and Bor-
der Protection agency is responsible for controlling the entry of both peo-
ple and substances into the United States.
96
Border Patrol, U.S.
The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is one of the busiest law-enforce-
ment agencies in the United States. On March 1, 2003, the Department of
Homeland Security unified border personnel working in the immigration,
customs, agriculture, and border patrol divisions under one agency. Formerly
known as the U.S. Border Patrol under the Immigration and Naturalization
Service, the border patrol was originally founded in 1924 after Congress
passed strict limitations on legal immigration. With only several hundred
mounted agents on horseback, there were challenges in patrolling all the ar-
eas between inspection stations in the United States. Over the next eighty
years, the border patrols evolved into a technologically advanced and increas-
ingly sophisticated workforce with nearly ten thousand uniformed agents.
Twenty-First Century Missions During the early twenty-first century,

the CBP still maintained its primary mission to prevent the illegal entry of
goods and immigrants into the United States. This duty, undertaken in coop-
eration with numerous other local and state law-enforcement agencies across
the United States, resulted in approximately twelve million arrests between
1994 and 2004. This monumental task requires scrutiny from the land, air,
and sea of more than 6,000 miles of international boundaries with Canada
and Mexico and another 2,000 miles of coastal waters. Agents from twenty-
one sectors across the United States work in all weather conditions and ter-
rains, twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year.
Before 1924, a force of fewer than forty mounted inspectors rode the bor-
ders looking for Chinese migrants attempting to enter the country in viola-
tion of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. Mexican workers proved so valuable
to the economy of the American Southwest that little effort was made to pre-
vent them from crossing the Rio Grande to work for cotton and sugar beet
growers and as agricultural laborers. A literacy test passed in 1917 during
World War I made it more difficult for farmhands to enter the United States,
but the test could be avoided easily by sneaking into the country at night. En-
forcement was lax because of protests from growers and farmers who de-
pended on a cheap labor supply for their economic livelihood.
Dealing with Illegal Immigration During the early 1920’s, illegal im-
migration from Mexico far exceeded the average of fifty thousand legitimate
immigrants per year. In 1921, Congress adopted a restrictive immigration pol-
icy based on a national quota system. Supporters argued for including the
peoples of the Western Hemisphere in the limitations but did not succeed be-
cause of opposition from the State Department and agricultural interests in
Texas, Arizona, and California. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes told
Congress that limiting Latin American immigration would harm attempts to
improve diplomatic relations with that part of the world, while farmers and
growers claimed that a steady supply of migrants from south of the border was
necessary to keep them in business. For these reasons, both the Senate and
the House agreed to put no restrictions on New World peoples.
97
Border Patrol, U.S.
When Congress passed a law in 1924 establishing a national origins system

for immigrants, it again excluded people from the Western Hemisphere. A
proposal to include Latin Americans and Canadians under this more restric-
tive policy failed by large margins in the House and Senate. Hughes once
again testified in opposition to the amendment and repeated his statement
that the foreign policy of the United States demanded favorable treatment of
migrants from Western nations.
A new element entered this debate in Congress, however, as several con-
gresspeople, led by Representative John Box of Texas, emphasized what they
perceived as the racial and cultural inferiority of the Mexican population.
Image Not Available
98
Border Patrol, U.S.
The discussion in Congress focused on Mexicans because they made up the

largest portion of immigrants from the New World. Almost 100,000 had
crossed the border legally in 1924. Thousands more had entered illegally to
escape paying the eighteen-dollar visa fee required of all immigrants under
the new law. The flow of Central and South Americans coming into the coun-
try numbered fewer than five thousand that year and was not perceived as a
threat.
Opponents of Immigration Advocates of ending the flows of both legal

and illegal immigration argued that Mexicans were taking away American
jobs and working for starvation wages. The American Federation of Labor,
under its new president, William Green, and the American Legion were ma-
jor proponents of this viewpoint. “Scientific racists,” who believed that white
America was disappearing, argued about the dangers of “colored blood” pol-
luting America and contaminating its way of life. Most Mexicans had Indian
blood in them.
According to racial theorists of the time, Indians were inferior to Nordic
types in intelligence and physical ability. The 1924 law was aimed at keeping
the inferior races of southern and eastern Europe out of the country. It made
no sense, therefore, to allow free access to inferiors from other parts of the
world. These arguments had been successful in winning approval of the 1921
quota system, whereby each nationality group in the United States was limited
in immigration each year to 3 percent of its total number in the United States
according to the 1910 census. The 1924 law reduced the total to 2 percent of
the population according to the census base of 1890. Congress decided to re-
move Latin America and Canada from these restrictions principally because
of the belief that cheap Mexican labor was necessary to keep American farm-
ers prosperous.
Labor unions had frequently challenged that view. During the 1921-1922
depression in the United States, they began a campaign to include Latin
Americans under the quota system. They had a strong ally in Secretary of
Labor James J. Davis, a former union president. He ordered all unem-
ployed Mexicans to leave the United States in 1922. Resentment and violence
mounted because of the economic hard times, and in some Texas towns starv-
ing Mexicans were physically expelled. When the short depression ended and
job opportunities opened, agricultural interests petitioned Congress to re-
open the borders. Mexican labor was too valuable to the economy to exclude
completely, because Mexicans did the jobs Americans simply would not do,
and for wages Americans would not accept. The Spanish-speaking aliens
would not become permanent residents, Congress was reassured, and they of-
fered no political threat since the poll tax still in effect in Texas and other
southern states prevented them from voting. The sugar beet growers and cot-
ton farmers tried to appease the labor unions by arguing that the aliens were
unskilled laborers and therefore were not a threat to American workers.
The same reasoning kept Canadians from inclusion in the new immigra-
99
Border Patrol, U.S.
tion system. These immigrants were mostly from French-speaking Quebec

and worked in New England textile mills for very low wages. Most of the con-
gressional debate centered on Mexicans, and there was little discussion of im-
migration from the north. Congress’s major fear seemed to be that large
numbers of “peons” from south of the border were entering the United States
illegally and that they posed a threat to American values and customs because
they were Roman Catholics and spoke a foreign language. Something had to
be done to stop that flood, but the economic interests of southwestern farm-
ers would also have to be protected. If, for foreign policy and economic rea-
sons, Latin Americans could not be in the quota system, the reasoning went,
perhaps the borders of the United States could be secured from illegal immi-
gration by tighter controls. Smuggling of impoverished workers from south
of the border was a major problem, and no agency of the American govern-
ment existed to control it.
Birth of the Border Patrol Concern over the flow of laborers from the
south led to the establishment of the U.S. Border Patrol on May 8, 1924. Con-
gressman Claude Hudspeth of Texas, who owned a large farm in East Texas
but who was not dependent on Mexican labor, proposed its creation and got
Congress to provide $1 million for this new branch of the Bureau of Immigra-
tion and Naturalization in the Department of Labor. The Border Patrol had
450 officers, whose main job was to ride the Mexican border on horseback
seeking out smugglers and the hiding places of illegal aliens. Opposition to
the Border Patrol proved to be considerable. Ranchers and farmers protested
and interfered with the arrests of their laborers. Patrol officers were told to
expel any alien who could not prove that he or she had paid the visa fee.
The growers bitterly assailed the increasingly difficult requirements for le-
gal immigration. The 1924 law mandated not only a ten-dollar visa fee, which
had to be paid to an American consul in the nation of origin, but also a six-
dollar head tax for each applicant. Few Mexicans could afford these fees be-
cause their average wage was twelve cents for a ten-hour day in their home-
land. These fees thus encouraged illegal entry and the smuggling of laborers.
For a small sum paid to smugglers, Mexican peasants could avoid the fees and
the literacy test and easily find jobs paying $1.25 a day in Texas, Arizona, and
California. In its first year of operation, the small Border Patrol staff reported
turning back 15,000 aliens seeking illegal entry, although an estimated
100,000 farmworkers successfully evaded the border guards. For that reason,
in 1926 Congress doubled the size of the Border Patrol and made it a perma-
nent part of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization.
Impact of Event During its first three years of operation, the Border Pa-
trol turned back an annual average of fifteen thousand Mexicans seeking ille-
gal entry. It did not have enough personnel to end all illegal entry, and Mexi-
can workers were too valuable to the economy of the Southwest to eliminate
completely. Ranchers and farmers who benefited greatly by using Mexican la-
100
Border Patrol, U.S.
bor continued to oppose the picking up and deporting of field hands who
preferred to deal with smugglers rather than paying the visa fee and head tax.
In 1926, the Immigration Service backed away from strict enforcement of
the law and entered into a “gentlemen’s agreement” with agricultural inter-
ests in California and Texas. This called for registration of all Mexican work-
ers in the states. They would each receive an identification card that allowed
them to work, in exchange for an eighteen-dollar fee payable at three dollars
per week. When Congressman John Box heard about “immigration on the in-
stallment plan,” he was outraged and called for an end to this “outlaw’s agree-
ment.” He denounced Mexicans as racially inferior to white Europeans, since
they were mainly Indian, and warned that their illegal influx had been so
large that they threatened to reverse the results of the Mexican War of 1846-
1848. After that conflict, the United States had acquired California, Arizona,
and much of the Southwest, but now, according to Box, “blood-thirsty, igno-
rant” bandits from Mexico were becoming the largest population in those ar-
eas and retaking them.
Because of such fears, Congress, in 1929, voted to double the size of the
Border Patrol and demanded a crackdown on illegal entry. Congress was also
responding to union demands for increased border security. Steel corpora-
tions had recently begun to recruit Mexicans from the Southwest to work in
places such as Chicago and Gary, Indiana, where they would be paid less than
Anglo-Americans. As European labor became more restricted because of the
national origins requirement, Mexico and Latin America were seen by north-
ern industrialists as new sources of cheap labor, much to the annoyance of
labor unions. For many impoverished agricultural workers, the economic re-
wards seemed worth the risk. Many Mexicans moved north to Illinois, Michi-
gan, and Ohio. In response, the Texas legislature passed a law charging a
$1,000 fee for labor recruiters before they could begin operating in the state.
The growers and farmers did not want all their cheap labor to move north.
A new law, suggested by the State Department, said that anyone caught en-
tering the United States after having been deported previously would be
charged with a felony and be liable for up to two years of imprisonment. This
legislation greatly decreased illegal entry into North America. The Border
Patrol was also authorized to cover the borders of Florida and Canada. The
gentlemen’s agreement was ended, and the full eighteen-dollar fee was again
required. These measures, plus the economic insecurity brought about by the
worldwide depression beginning in 1929, temporarily ended the conflict over
illegal immigration from Mexico and other nations of the Western Hemi-
sphere. The issue would not reemerge as an important problem until after
World War II. The most important impact of the creation of the Border Patrol
was to make illegal entry into the United States much more difficult than it
ever had been before. A government agency now had the authority to arrest
and deport illegal aliens.
Leslie V. Tischauser
Updated by the editors
101
Border Patrol, U.S.
Further Reading
controversial issues relating to immigration. Among the specific subjects
covered is the enforcement of laws regulating undocumented workers.
Crosthwaite, Luis Humberto, John William Byrd, and Bobby Byrd, eds. Puro
Border: Dispatches, Snapshots and Graffiti from La Frontera. El Paso, Tex.:
Cinco Puntos Press, 2003. This collage of illustrations and writings at-
tempts to portray the various cultural and geographical considerations of
those people who live on the line. Considers how the destitute of Mexico
are ignored and forgotten.
Cull, Nicholas J., and David Carrasco, eds. Alambrista and the U.S.-Mexico Bor-
der: Film, Music, and Stories of Undocumented Immigrants. Albuquerque: Uni-
versity of New Mexico Press, 2004. Collection of essays on dramatic works,
films, and music about Mexicans who cross the border illegally into the
United States.
Hunter, Miranda. Latino Americans and Immigration Laws: Crossing the Border.
Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2006. Up-to-date study of Latino immigration
that considers the changing role of the Border Patrol in the twenty-first
century.
Krauss, Erich. On the Line: Inside the U.S. Border Patrol. New York: Kensington,
2004. A former border patrol agent details the five-month basic training
regimen all agents must undergo and follows them into the field to give
the reader a sense of how smugglers and drug dealers challenge these
agents who work on the line every day.
wood Press, 1999. History of U.S. immigration laws supported by extensive
extracts from documents.
Moore, Alvin Edward. Border Patrol. Santa Fe, N.Mex.: Sunstone Press, 1991.
Based on actual incidents, this fictional work describes a world of smug-
glers and illegal aliens and the dangerous nature of working on the U.S./
Mexico border.
Nevin, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the “Illegal Alien” and the Making
of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge, 2002. Details the federal
government’s Operation Gatekeeper, which in the 1990’s targeted the San
Diego-Tijuana border in efforts to stop illegal immigration. The author ar-
gues that this assault on immigration did not effectively reduce unautho-
rized immigration and served to inflame anti-Hispanic racism in the United
States.
Ngai, Mae M. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. Scholarly study of social
and legal issues relating to illegal aliens in the United States during the
twenty-first century.
Perkins, Clifford A. Border Patrol: With the U.S. Immigration Service on the Mexi-
102
Bracero program
can Boundary, 1910-1954. El Paso: Texas Western Press, 1978. The recollec-
tions and adventures of a former district officer. Discusses the founding,
staffing, and organization of the Border Patrol and the contributions of
some of its early members. Useful information on the education, attitudes,
and responsibilities of officers. Told from the point of view of an officer
who supported the mission of the Border Patrol. Many anecdotes concern-
ing the methods used by enforcement officers. Has little to say in favor of
open borders and free migration.
Staeger, Rob. Deported Aliens. Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004. Up-to-date
analysis of the treatment of undocumented immigrants in the United
States since the 1960’s, with particular attention to issues relating to depor-
tation.
Urrea, Luis Alberto. The Devil’s Highway: A True Story. Boston: Little, Brown,
2004. Graphic, true story describes the harrowing journey of twenty-six
Mexican men who attempted to enter the Arizona desert. The author ar-
gues that U.S. immigration policies are inhumane.
Urrea, Luis Alberto, and John Lueders-Booth. Across the Wire: Life and Hard
Times on the Mexican Border. New York: Doubleday, 1992. The author de-
scribes his interactions with Mexicans who live on the border and the de-
plorable living conditions that many of them suffer.
Williams, Mary E., ed. Immigration: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Green-
haven Press, 2004. Various social, political, and legal viewpoints are given
by experts and observers familiar with immigration into the United States.
See also Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Illegal aliens; Immigration and

Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Justice and immigration; Operation
Wetback.
Bracero program
Identification: U.S.-Mexico government program undertaken to facilitate
the importation of Mexican farmworkers into the United States
Date: 1942-1964
Immigration issues: Border control; Economics; Illegal immigration; La-

bor; Latino immigrants; Mexican immigrants
Significance: The shortage of farm labor caused by U.S. entry into World
War II prompted creation of the bracero program, but growing depen-
dence of American farms on Mexican labor kept the program going nearly
two decades after the war ended.
103
Bracero program
Housing for Mexican migrant workers in Edcouch, Texas. (Library of Congress)
U.S. entry into World War II at the end of 1941 created an agricultural labor
shortage in the United States. As early as 1942, American farmers were com-
plaining about labor shortages farms faced and demanding that workers be
brought in to help plant, harvest, and distribute their agricultural products.
In response, the U.S. and Mexican governments created the bracero pro-
gram, also known as the Mexican Farm Labor Program (MFLP). The pro-
gram contained many provisions designed to protect both the farmers and
the braceros (a term that comes from the Spanish word brazos, meaning
“arms” or “helping arms”).
Because many Mexicans were afraid of being forced into the U.S. military
upon arrival in the country because of the war, one provision was that no
Mexican contract workers could be sent to fight in the U.S. military. Another
provision was that Mexican laborers were not to be subjected to discrimina-
tory acts of any kind. The United States agreed that the contract laborers’
round-trip transportation expenses from Mexico would be paid and ade-
quate living arrangements would be provided for them in the United States.
There was also a provision that the braceros would not displace local workers
or lower their wages.
The braceros were to be employed only in the agricultural realm and
on the basis of contractual agreements—written in English and Spanish—
between the braceros and their employers. The farmers agreed to pay the bra-
ceros wages equal to those prevailing in the area of employment, and no less
than thirty cents an hour, for a minimum of three-quarters of the duration of
the contract. The braceros also were granted the right to organize. Ten per-
104
Bracero program
cent of the braceros’ earnings were to be deducted and deposited in savings

funds, payable upon their return to Mexico. Finally, the braceros were to be
given sanitary housing. In 1943, braceros would be granted the right to have a
Mexican consul and Mexican labor inspectors intervene in disputes on their
behalf. With these provisions and guidelines intact, on September 29, 1942,
the first fifteen hundred braceros were transported to California by train.
Problems Arise Braceros encountered a variety of problems in the United

States. Although their contracts were explained to them before they signed
them, many braceros did not have a basic understanding of the contracts’
terms and conditions. Workers often understood little beyond the fact that
they were going to work in the United States. Despite the difficulties of mov-
ing from one country to another, when the braceros arrived in the United
States, they were not given time to orient themselves to their new surround-
ings but were required to report for work the day after their arrival.
Farmers were skeptical of the MFLP because they viewed it as infringing on
their own welfare and traditional independence. The farmers wanted the fed-
eral government to provide workers, but they wanted it to be done on their
own terms. However, the labor shortage crisis was so severe that the farmers
consented to the government’s program. Once the braceros were consigned
to their employers, the binational agreement between Mexico and the United
States was followed weakly, if at all, by the farmers. The farmers, who had
much more power and control than the Mexican labor inspectors did, could
basically do as they pleased with the workers and their contracts.
For example, as contract laborers, the bracero workers were expected to
adapt to and stay on the job under adverse conditions from which local work-
ers would have turned away. The bracero workforce was used for the heaviest
and worst-paid jobs. This meant that the bulk of the imported workforce was
used largely in the production and harvesting of crops that required large
numbers of temporary, seasonal laborers for physically demanding stoop
work. The braceros were considered a blessing, because local workers refused
to do stoop labor. The farmers used the argument that Mexicans were better
suited for back-bending labor than were the local workers to justify their
claim that they could not continue farming without the braceros. Braceros
frequently were treated as animals. Despite the ill treatment and harsh condi-
tions, many braceros continued to migrate in order to find work and much-
needed money.
Dependency Develops By entering into an agreement with Mexican

workers and the federal government, agriculture began a dependency on
braceros that continued after World War II had ended. Within a year of the
program’s inception, braceros had in many areas become a mainstay in farm
production.
After World War II ended in 1945, the Migratory Labor Agreement was
signed with Mexico to continue encouraging the seasonal importation of
105
Bracero program
farmworkers. Between 1948 and 1964, some 4.5 million Mexicans were
brought to the United States for temporary work. Braceros were expected
to return to Mexico at the end of their labor contract, but often they stayed.
Although the United States government sanctioned this importation of Mex-
ican workers, it shunned the importation of workers during times of eco-
nomic difficulties. During the 1953-1954 recession, the government mounted
a campaign called Operation Wetback to deport illegal entrants and braceros
who had remained in the country illegally. Deportations numbered in excess
of 1.1 million. As immigration officials searched out illegal workers, persons
from Central and South America, as well as native-born U.S. citizens of Cen-
tral or South American descent, found themselves vulnerable to this search.
Protestations of the violation of their rights occurred, but to little effect.
Although the jobs reserved for the braceros were generally despised, they
were nevertheless essential first links in the robust wartime food production
chain. In this capacity, the Mexican workers made a vital and measurable con-
tribution to the total war effort.
Kristine Kleptach Jamieson
Further Reading
Copp, Nelson Gage. “Wetbacks” and Braceros: Mexican Migrant Laborers and
American Immigration Policy, 1930-1960. San Francisco: R and E Research As-
sociates, 1971. Provides detailed accounts of emigration and immigration
policies affecting migrant agricultural workers from Mexico.
Craig, Richard B. The Bracero Program: Interest Groups and Foreign Policy. Austin:
University of Texas Press, 1971. Discusses the political agreement between
the United States and Mexico regarding migrant laborers.
Galarza, Ernesto. Merchants of Labor: The Mexican Bracero Story. Santa Barbara,
Calif.: McNally & Loftin West, 1978. Discusses the treatment of braceros
and the effects of the bracero program in California.
Gamboa, Erasmo. Mexican Labor and World War II: Braceros in the Pacific North-
west, 1942-1947. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990. A detailed history
of the life, conditions, and social policy affecting migrant workers from
Mexico in the United States.
Gonzalez, Gilbert G. Guest Workers or Colonized Labor? Mexican Labor Migration
to the United States. Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm, 2005. Study of the state of
Mexican labor immigration to the United States in the early twenty-first
century.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. General history of the
problem of illegal immigration in the United States that includes a chapter
covering Operation Wetback and the bracero program.
Valdes, Dennis Nodin. Al Norte: Agricultural Workers in the Great Lakes Region,
1917-1970. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1991. An in-depth discussion
of the Mexican migration to and settlement in the upper Midwest regions.
106
British as dominant group
See also Chicano movement; Farmworkers’ union; Immigration Reform

and Control Act of 1986; Mexican deportations during the Depression; Oper-
ation Wetback; Undocumented workers.

grants; Slavery
Significance: Beginning during the early seventeenth century and continu-

ing unabated for more than three centuries, there was an immense flood
of immigrants to North America from Great Britain. These people deter-
mined the linguistics, culture, religion, and politics of North America in
ways that are still perceptible.
The seventeenth century was marked by a wave of English immigrants, in-

cluding some who were indentured, to remote colonies in England’s North
American and Caribbean territories. These early arrivals were joined in the
eighteenth century by Scotch-Irish and Scots settlers and, later, by Catholic
Irish. In the first two centuries of settlement, African slaves were introduced
to the New World. These later arrivals had an inestimable impact on North
America, but certain factors help explain the British stamp.
The dominance of the English, both in the colonies and in Britain, was one
factor. The British crown exerted control over immigration in the seven-
teenth century, with more than 70 percent of immigrants being English. Few
Scots, Welsh, or Irish immigrated in the first decades of the colonial period,
thus giving the English language and the Anglican (Episcopal) Church a
commanding position in everyday colonial life. When non-English groups ar-
rived, they were confronted by a generally Anglicized society.
The changing dynamics of political and religious thought and the distance
across the Atlantic Ocean helped make settlement a regional phenomenon.
The land settled by various Britons was isolated and inwardly divided, often
along religious lines. For example, in the northern colonies, where there was
less arable land and farms were small, dissenters from within the Anglican
Church, known as Puritans, were the dominant group, along with a few
Dutch- and German-speaking peoples. In the southern colonies, particularly
in the tidewater regions, the traditional Episcopal faith was observed. Other
Protestants, such as the Presbyterian Scotch-Irish, were pushed to the fron-
tier, where they raised large families to work small farm plots. The dominant
Anglo-Americans with the best land settled onto large plantations.
It was in the coastal region, with its link to the Caribbean sugar centers,
107
Romanticized painting of the first Thanksgiving celebrated by English pilgrims in the New World in
1621. The event has traditionally been seen as a symbol of hope and cordial relations between the
new settlers and Native Americans, but it may also be seen as a symbol of the first step toward Brit-
ish domination of North America. (Library of Congress)
that African slavery took hold in British America. Slavery served as cheap la-
bor that allowed for an almost aristocratic way of life that provided material
benefit to the empire. Slaves contributed much to the way of life in the South
but were in turn Anglicized. This continued until the British government
made an effort to end the transatlantic (though not domestic) slave trade
during the late eighteenth century.
British Domination of North America British domination of North

America was seemingly ensured when the British defeated the French in the
Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) and with the decline of the Spanish in eastern
North America. Ironically, these events precipitated the end of direct British
rule in the colonies. Though the colonies remained divided on many issues,
grievances against the British crown led to the American Revolution. Drawing
from the ideas of leading Enlightenment theorists, especially Englishman
John Locke, the American revolutionaries succeeded in overthrowing British
rule and establishing a fledgling republic.
North America did not, however, become less British as a culture. The
United States, and later Canada, essentially continued the same patterns of
commerce, Indian affairs, and settlement begun in the colonial period. Sub-
108
Burlingame Treaty
sequent non-British immigrants to North America thus entered a society de-

fined by British roots but open to contributions from elsewhere.
Gene Redding Wynne, Jr.
Further Reading
Menard, Russell R. Migrants, Servants, and Slaves: Unfree Labor in Colonial Brit-
ish America. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2001.
tory. Washington Square, N.Y.: New York University Press, 2001.
Van Vugt, William E. Britain to America: Mid-Nineteenth-Century Immigrants to the
United States. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999.
Wepman, Dennis. Immigration: From the Founding of Virginia to the Closing of Ellis
Island. New York: Facts On File, 2002.
See also Anglo-conformity; Assimilation theories; Euro-Americans; Euro-

pean immigrants, 1790-1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; White ethnics.
Burlingame Treaty
The Treaty: Treaty between the United States and China
Date: July 28, 1868
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Laws and treaties
Significance: The Burlingame Treaty established reciprocal rights between

China and the United States, including respect for territorial sovereignty
and bilateral immigration.
Formal American interest in China dates from the thirteen-thousand-mile

voyage of the U.S. ship Empress of China, under the command of Captain John
Green, which departed from New York City on February 22, 1784. The vessel
returned from Canton in May, 1785, with tea, silks, and other trade goods of
the Orient. Merchants in Philadelphia, Boston, Providence, and New York
quickly sought profits in the China trade. By the late 1830’s, “Yankee clippers”
had shortened the transit time from America’s Atlantic ports to Canton from
a matter of many months to a mere ninety days.
Chinese Politics Political problems, however, hindered commercial rela-

tions. The Manchu, or Ch’ing, Dynasty (1644-1912), fearful of Western inten-
tions, restricted trade to one city, Canton, and sharply curtailed the rights of
foreigners in China. Chafing at these limits, especially China’s refusal to deal
109
Burlingame Treaty
Illustration from an August, 1869, issue of Harper’s Weekly depicting the completion of the Pacific
Railroad, which employed large numbers of Chinese workers. (Library of Congress)
with Europeans on terms of equality, caused Great Britain to begin hostilities

with the Manchu Dynasty, occasioned by the “unsavory issue” of England’s
trade in opium with China. The Opium War (1839-1842) resulted in the
Treaty of Nanking (August 24, 1842), a triumph for the political and commer-
cial interests of Great Britain in eastern Asia.
Britain obtained the cession of the island of Hong Kong and the opening
of four additional cities—Amoy, Ningpo, Foochow, and Shanghai—to British
trade. The U.S. government desired similar rights and obtained them in the
Treaty of Wanghia (named for a village near Macao) on July 3, 1844; Commis-
sioner Caleb Cushing, although not formally received by China as a minister,
was permitted to negotiate this landmark agreement. The United States se-
cured access to the newly opened ports and was extended the right of extra-
territoriality; that is, U.S. citizens were to be tried for offenses committed in
China under U.S. law by the U.S. consul.
Within the next twenty years, trade with China grew. The United States ac-
quired Washington, Oregon, and California, and, with Pacific ports, had
greater access to Chinese markets. The California gold rush (1849) and the
construction of the Central Pacific Railroad (completed in 1869), with its
need for labor, encouraged Chinese emigration to the United States. Mean-
while, U.S. missionaries, merchants, travelers, and adventurers were arriving
in China. Conditions in “the Middle Kingdom,” however, were not good. The
authority of the central government had been challenged by the anti-Western
110
Burlingame Treaty
Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864) and was suppressed only with outside help.
Further European incursions into China, epitomized by the Anglo-French
War with the Manchus (1854-1858), threatened to curtail U.S. cultural and
commercial opportunities in China. If the United States did not act, it would
face the prospect of being excluded from China by European imperialism.
American Diplomatic Representation Secretary of State William Henry

Seward believed that it was time for the United States to have formal repre-
sentation at the Manchu court. His fortunate choice was Anson Burlingame.
Born on November 14, 1820, in rural New York, the son of a “Methodist
exhorter,” Burlingame had grown up in the Midwest, graduating from the
University of Michigan. After attending Harvard Law School, Burlingame
went into practice in Boston. With a gift of oratory and exceptional personal
charm, Burlingame served in the U.S. House of Representatives (1855-1861)
and was a pioneer of the new Republican Party. As a reward for his labor and
in recognition of his talents, Burlingame was offered the post of U.S. minister
to Austria, but the Habsburgs refused him because of his known sympathies
with Louis Kossuth, the Hungarian revolutionary. As a second choice and a
compensatory honor, Burlingame was given the assignment to China.
Because the United States was distracted with the Civil War, Burlingame
was left on his own and could count on little U.S. military might to support his
actions. Acquiring a great admiration for and confidence in the Chinese,
Burlingame won the trust and respect of I-Hsin, known as Prince Kung, the
co-regent of China with the dowager empress Cixi (Tz’u-hsi). When Bur-
lingame resigned as the U.S. minister to China, in November, 1867, the Impe-
rial Manchu court asked him to
head China’s first official delega-
tion to the West. The Burlingame
mission toured the United States,
being warmly received, and arrived
in the United Kingdom as Wil-
liam Gladstone was assuming the
prime ministership of that nation.
Burlingame’s brilliant career was
cut short during a subsequent visit
to Russia, where he contracted
pneumonia, dying in St. Peters-
burg on February 23, 1870. Few
had served their own country so
well, and it was said that none had
given China a more sincere friend-
ship.
The most outstanding accom-
plishment of the Burlingame mis- Anson Burlingame, the American diplomatic minis-
sion was the Burlingame Treaty, ter to China from 1861 to 1867. (NARA)
111
Burlingame Treaty
signed on July 28, 1868, in Washington, D.C. This document dealt with a vari-
ety of issues between China and the United States. The United States pledged
itself to respect Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity, a position in
sharp contrast to that of the European powers and one that anticipated the
subsequent U.S. “open door policy” (1899). The Burlingame Treaty accepted
bilateral immigration between China and the United States, and by 1880
there were 105,000 Chinese living in the United States.
By the standards of the 1860’s, the Burlingame Treaty was a landmark of
fairness and justice. However, the United States did not honor its spirit or let-
ter. Anti-immigrant feeling focused on a fear of Chinese “coolie” labor. The
infamous Sandlot Riots in San Francisco, in June, 1877, were symptomatic of
both the mistreatment of Asian immigrants and the rising sentiment for
Asian exclusion. On March 1, 1879, President Rutherford B. Hayes vetoed a
congressional bill limiting the number of Chinese passengers on board ships
bound for the United States as a violation of the Burlingame Treaty. Hayes
did, however, send a mission to China to work for the revision of the Burlin-
game Treaty. In 1880, China recognized the U.S. right to regulate, limit, and
suspend, but not absolutely forbid, Chinese immigration.
Two years later, President Chester A. Arthur vetoed a twenty-year suspen-
sion of Chinese immigration as being a de facto prohibition, but on May 6,
1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act passed, suspending the importation of Chi-
nese labor for a ten-year period. In 1894, another ten-year exclusion period
was enacted; in 1904, exclusion was extended indefinitely. When, on Decem-
ber 17, 1943, Chinese immigration was permitted by an act of Congress, it was
within the strict limits of the 1920’s quota system, allowing the entrance of
only 105 Chinese annually. Not until the mid-twentieth century did the
United States depart from an immigration policy centered on ethnic origin,
thus allowing the original intent of the Burlingame Treaty to be realized.
C. George Fry
Further Reading
Study of the interrelationships among African Americans, Chinese im-
migrants, and European Americans in the United States during the mid-
nineteenth century.
Dulles, Foster Rhea. China and America: The Story of Their Relations Since 1784.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1946. This brief, classic history
places the Burlingame Treaty in the broad context of United States-
Chinese trade and diplomacy over a period of 150 years.
Fairbank, John K. China Perceived: Images and Policies in Chinese-American Rela-
tions. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974. A noted Harvard scholar compares
the contrasting sensitivities, traditions, aims, and means of the United
States and China as they have affected foreign policy.
112
Cable Act
Fairbank, John K., Edwin O. Reischauer, and Albert M. Craig. East Asia: Tradi-
tion and Transformation. Rev. ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1989. This pro-
fusely illustrated and thoroughly documented survey, a standard introduc-
tion to the history of Asia’s Pacific Rim, illuminates the Chinese situation
in 1868.
Miller, Stuart Creighton. The Unwelcome Immigrant: The American Image of the
Chinese, 1785-1882. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. A suc-
cinct analysis that explains why the Chinese were the only immigrants
other than Africans to be forbidden by law from entering the United States
in the nineteenth century.
Mosher, Steven W. China Misperceived: American Illusions and Chinese Reality.
New York: Basic Books, 1990. This combination of psychohistory and polit-
ical analysis examines the varied U.S. perceptions of China, ranging from
infatuation to hostility. Carefully annotated.
Peffer, George Anthony. If They Don’t Bring Women Here: Chinese Female Immi-
gration Before Exclusion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999. Scholarly
study of the special problems faced by Chinese women who wished to come
to the United States.
Tsai, Shih-shan Henry. China and the Overseas Chinese in the United States, 1868-
1911. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 1983. Well-documented,
concise, in-depth study of the key issue between the United States and
China during the late nineteenth century: immigration.
See also Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases; Chinese immi-
grants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Coolies; Gentlemen’s
Agreement.
Cable Act
The Law: Federal law restricting citizenship rights of immigrants
Date: Became law on September 22, 1922
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Families and marriage;

Laws and treaties; Women
Significance: The Cable Act revoked the principle of allowing immigrant

wives of American citizens automatically to assume the American citizen-
ship of their husbands.
The Cable Act reformed the rules by which women lost or obtained U.S. citi-
zenship through marriage to foreigners. Representative John L. Cable of
Ohio noted when introducing his bill that “the laws of our country should
113
Cable Act
grant independent citizenship to women.” By this act, the United States took
the lead among nations in the world in acknowledging the right of a woman
to choose her citizenship rather than to lose or gain it upon marriage. During
the early twentieth century, under the laws of virtually all nations, a woman
automatically lost her citizenship and took that of her husband upon mar-
riage to a foreigner. The Cable Act, supported by all major women’s groups at
the time, was viewed as an important piece of reform legislation aimed at pro-
tecting a woman’s right to choose her citizenship. As Representative Cable
noted upon the bill’s passage into law: “Justice and common sense dictate
that the woman should have the same right as the man to choose the country
of her allegiance.”
The effects of the Cable Act were varied. Although aimed primarily at recti-
fying cases in which American women, under the 1907 Expropriation Act, au-
tomatically lost their U.S. citizenship upon marriage to an alien, it also re-
voked provisions of an 1885 act that automatically conferred U.S. citizenship
on alien women who married Americans. Therefore, a foreign woman could
not automatically become an American citizen upon marriage to an Ameri-
can, even if that were her desire. Instead, like any other alien, she would have
to undergo an independent process of naturalization. One effect of this as-
pect of the law was to discourage Chinese American men from marrying im-
migrant women. For these reasons, the Cable Act has been considered anti-
immigrant and anti-women by some latter-day observers. However, although
an alien woman who married a U.S. citizen or whose husband became natu-
ralized would no longer automatically be granted citizenship, she was not ex-
cluded from seeking U.S. citizenship. The act made the process of becoming
an American citizen a matter of deliberate choice rather than an automatic
effect of marriage. The Cable Act did not revoke the citizenship of any woman
who before its passage had received American citizenship automatically by
marriage.
The ultimate effect of the Cable Act was to treat women of all ethnic and ra-
cial backgrounds with complete equality insofar as the acquisition of U.S. citi-
zenship was concerned. Modern human rights treaties generally follow this
U.S. practice, recognizing that acquisition of citizenship should be a matter
of free and independent consent.
Robert F. Gorman
Further Reading
Houle, Michelle E., ed. Immigration. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Greenhaven
Press/Thomson/Gale, 2004.
wood Press, 1999.
Shanks, Cheryl. Immigration and the Politics of American Sovereignty, 1890-1990.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001.
114
California gold rush
See also Chinese immigrants; Citizenship; Japanese American Citizens

League; Naturalization; Naturalization Act of 1790; Ozawa v. United States;
Wong Kim Ark case.

The Event: Rapid influx of immigrants into California after the discovery of
gold in the territory recently taken by the United States from Mexico
Date: January 24, 1848-September 4, 1849
Place: Western slope of the Sierra Nevada
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Economics; European immigrants
Significance: Discovery of the precious metal invited a flood of eastern for-

tune seekers and global immigrants into the new U.S. territory, accelerat-
ing the development of the western terrorities of the United States and
raising issues about the immigration of Asians that would not be fully re-
solved for more than a century.
On January 24, 1848, James W. Marshall discovered gold in the terrace of a

mill that a group of men were erecting for John A. Sutter on the south fork of
the American River, near Sacramento in Northern California. Despite Sut-
ter’s efforts to keep the news secret until he could secure and protect the vast
estates he had obtained by Mexican land grants, California newspapers re-
vealed the find in March. By May, the rush had started, and San Francisco,
Monterey, San Jose, and other California communities were depopulated of
men who headed for the streams flowing westward from the Sierra Nevada.
During the first working season in the summer of 1848, Californians, joined
by a few men from Oregon and Hawaii, searched for the precious metal with-
out competition from the horde of gold seekers who would soon descend on
the gold country.
The Rush Begins News of the discovery first reached the East in August,
when the New York Herald published a report; the next month, official word ar-
rived from Thomas O. Larkin, the U.S. consul in Monterey, who was alarmed
at the impact of the event. After a tour of the diggings, Richard B. Mason, mil-
itary governor of California, forwarded a report to Washington, D.C., accom-
panied by a small box of sample gold. In December, 1848, when President
James K. Polk notified Congress of the gold discovery in his annual message,
the United States and the whole world realized that earlier reports were true.
Gold fever broke out in the eastern United States; thousands made arrange-
ments to go to California in the spring. Some gold seekers planned to migrate
115
and operate independently, while others organized cooperative groups or

companies to share expenses, labor, and profits.
Many people living on the eastern seacoast elected to travel to California
by sea. Within a month following the president’s message, sixty-one ships had
left the Atlantic seaports for a voyage of six months around Cape Horn, arriv-
ing at their destination in the summer months of 1849. It was possible to
shorten the journey by taking a steamship to Chagres, crossing the Isthmus
of Panama by land, and boarding another ship at Panama, bound for Cali-
fornia, but passages were uncertain, even the most expensive accommoda-
tions were inadequate, and the isthmus was disease-ridden. When this route
became overcrowded, some travelers chose a longer crossing through Nicara-
gua; however, they found greater difficulty obtaining passage on the Pacific
side, because the vessels headed north already had been overloaded in
Panama.
The largest number of gold seekers went to California overland, a shorter
and cheaper trip. Warm weather permitted an early start on a journey across
northern Mexico or New Mexico. Texas trails converged on El Paso, from
which the adventurers headed west by way of Tucson and the Gila River into
southern California, and then northward to regions in the Sierra where gold
had been discovered. Santa Fe was another base, at which people arrived
from Fort Smith, Arkansas, having ascended the valley of the Canadian River,
or having come west from Missouri by way of the Santa Fe Trail.
At Santa Fe, some people elected to turn southward down the Rio Grande
and west along the Gila River, following the route of Stephen Kearny’s Army
of the West into California. Others turned north and west in a greater semicir-
cular path, known as the Old Spanish Trail, that went into southern Califor-
nia. The most popular route was the well-known Platte River Trail to the
South Pass, then by way of Fort Hall or Salt Lake City to the California Trail,
and across Nevada along the banks of the Humboldt River.
The Hazards of Migration The overland migration of 1849 along this

route appeared to duplicate that of earlier years, but there were considerable
differences. The danger from attacks by Native Americans was minimized be-
cause of the number of travelers, and parties were not nearly so likely to lose
the route. The heavy traffic exhausted the grass supply needed for animals,
however, and water holes along the trail were infected with Asiatic cholera.
Suffering was intense, because the immigrants knew nothing about traveling
along plains or over mountains.
Guides were scarce, and many guidebooks and newspaper accounts were
misleading. The trails were marked by the graves of those who had suc-
cumbed to cholera, dysentery, or mountain fever. Beyond the South Pass,
much of the route was over hot and dusty alkali deserts. In the desert crossing
between the sinks of the Humboldt and Carson Rivers, the ground was lit-
tered with abandoned wagons and carcasses of dead animals. Many weary im-
migrants resorted to pack animals or walked across the Sierra Nevada.
116
Chinese and white miners sluicing for gold at Auburn Ravine in Northern California’s Placer
County in 1852. (California State Library)
A relief society in Sacramento financed and delivered medical and food

supplies to groups stranded in the desert, saving many lives. Conditions were
equally bad in the desert west of the mouth of the Gila River. Those who wan-
dered from the established routes encountered indescribable suffering; one
party leaving the Colorado River to strike directly west into California left
most of its members in a valley subsequently known as Death Valley.
San Francisco became the metropolis of the gold country, and supply
towns grew at the strategic locations of Marysville, Sacramento, and Stockton.
Hundreds of mining camps sprang up near the diggings, with picturesque
names such as Poker Flat, Hangtown, Red Dog, Hell’s Delight, and Whiskey
Bar expressing the sentiments of a predominantly male society. Most of the
“forty-niners” who migrated to California were young, unmarried, and male.
However, thousands of women also made the voyage to California.
The High Cost of Living So many people came to California that the ma-
jority of gold seekers found it necessary to labor long, hard hours to obtain
the gold necessary to provide shelter and food. The weak and the defenseless
were quickly weeded out. As economic pressures mounted, prejudice against
117
racial and national minorities increased. California mining camps were cos-
mopolitan, and the Euro-Americans from New England, the South, the Mis-
souri frontier, and elsewhere used various devices to discriminate against
such groups as the Chinese, Mexicans, and African Americans.
Native-born Euro-Americans constituted almost 80 percent of all the forty-
niners. The second largest group was from Mexico and other countries of
Latin America. Approximately 7 percent came from Europe and Asia. English
and German immigrants were more successful at mining than were the
French, most of whom returned to the supply towns and became shopkeep-
ers. To escape the drudgery, miners occasionally spent days of recreation en-
gaged in contests of strength, endurance, and speed to demonstrate their
physical prowess. Many found amusement at night in the saloons, where they
gambled at red dog or faro, or in dancehalls with women. Nevertheless, the
miners were noted for their spontaneous humanitarianism in aiding the dis-
tressed.
When the gold rush began, California had a population of fourteen thou-
sand; by the end of 1849, there were an estimated one hundred thousand
in the former Mexican province. Exhibiting admirable leadership, some of
these men laid plans for the calling of a constitutional convention to meet in
September, 1849, to organize a new state seeking admission into the United
States.
During the early days, mining in California was highly rewarding—an aver-
age miner obtained between ten and fifty dollars a day—but the rate of return
declined rapidly as time passed. Nevertheless, until 1865 or thereabouts, an
average of almost fifty million dollars of gold per year was mined in Califor-
nia. While the first fortunes were made in the more easily accessible placer
deposits, the later fortunes generally were made by mining corporations that
could afford the capital and machinery required to work the deeper deposits.
The Gold Rush in U.S. History The more than seventy-five thousand
people who migrated to California in the hope of earning their fortunes had
a significant effect on American history. The huge influx of people from the
East displaced many Native Americans and highlighted racial tensions be-
tween the native-born and foreign-born. The notion of “manifest destiny” (a
term that had surfaced three years earlier in an article by John L. O’Sullivan
appearing in The United States Magazine and Democratic Review)—whereby ex-
pansionist interests held that it was the “fulfillment of our manifest destiny to
overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of
our yearly multiplying millions”—had taken hold of the nation. Because of
the large numbers of westward-moving fortune seekers, California was admit-
ted as a state in 1850. California miners developed new mining technology
that benefited mining in other regions of the country.
W. Turrentine Jackson
Judith Boyce DeMark
118
Celtic Irish
Further Reading
nineteenth century that includes a discussion of the gold rush era.
Gordon, Mary M., ed. Overland to California with the Pioneer Line. Urbana: Uni-
versity of Illinois Press, 1984. Collection of memoirs of participants in vari-
ous land expeditions to California during the 1840’s.
Levy, Jo Ann. “Forgotten Forty-Niners.” In American History. Vol. 1. Guilford,
Conn.: Dushkin, 1995. Provides new information on the experiences of
women in the California mining camps and surrounding towns.
Paul, Rodman W. California Gold: The Beginning of Mining in the Far West. Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1947. Covers several economic
and social aspects of the gold rush era, including the impact on California,
the contributions of the California miners to mining technology, and the
regulation of mining society, particularly the growth of vigilante commit-
tees.
Royce, Sarah. A Frontier Lady: Recollections of the Gold Rush and Early California.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1977. A diary that describes the au-
thor’s experiences as a wife who took part in the California gold rush.
See also Burlingame Treaty; Chinatowns; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese

immigrants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Chinese immi-
grants and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; “Yellow peril”
campaign.
Celtic Irish
Identification: Immigrants to North America of southern Celtic Irish de-
scent
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants; Irish immigrants
Significance: The Celtic Irish were first brought to English colonies in

North America as servants and laborers during the colonial era and long
faced discrimination and abuse.
During the 1650’s, the first immigrants from Ireland began to arrive in North
America. It was not until the early eighteenth century that large numbers of
people from throughout Ireland emigrated to North America. The majority
of these immigrants were from northern Ireland and of Scottish ancestry;
119
Censuses, U.S.
lesser numbers were from southern Ireland and identified themselves with
traditional native peoples of Ireland and a Celtic heritage.
The Scotch-Irish immigrants to North America were fourth- or fifth-gener-
ation Scots in Ireland who had largely assimilated into the Irish culture ex-
cept for their religious faith and their family names. The Scotch-Irish were
predominantly Protestant rather than Roman Catholic, and their family
names revealed a Scottish heritage. Scotch-Irish living in northern Ireland
considered themselves Irish, not Scottish. Immigrants to North America from
southern Ireland were predominantly Catholic and usually bore family names
of Celtic origin.
Despite the common heritage of Ireland, these two groups of immigrants
were regarded quite differently upon their arrival in North America. The
Protestant Scotch-Irish shared a common faith with the large numbers of es-
tablished Protestant English settlers. The smaller numbers of southern Irish
of Catholic and Celtic heritage became the focus of widespread ethnic dis-
crimination.
Randall L. Milstein
Further Reading
Almeida, Linda Dowling. Irish Immigrants in New York City, 1945-1995. Bloom-
ington: Indiana University Press, 2001.
York: Benchmark Books, 2001.
Paulson, Timothy J. Irish Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005.
See also Anti-Irish Riots of 1844; European immigrants, 1790-1892; Ger-

man and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; Immigration and Nationality Act of
1965; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants and African Americans; Irish immi-
grants and discrimination; Irish stereotypes; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
Censuses, U.S.
Definition: Official federal government enumerations of the nation’s entire
population—both citizens and noncitizens—taken every tenth year
Dates: Begun in 1790
Immigration issue: Demographics
Significance: Information collected by the U.S. Census includes each per-

son’s ethnic or racial background. This enables the size of each ethnic or
racial group to be compared over time and allows governmental programs
120
Censuses, U.S.
to take the size of an ethnic or racial group into account when determining
policy.
The U.S. Constitution requires that population be the basis for determining
the number of seats apportioned to each state in the U.S. House of Represen-
tatives. As the population of the country shifts, the decennial census permits
a readjustment in the number of seats for each state. Census reports have also
been used to calculate how many immigrants from particular countries are al-
lowed admission into the United States as well as to determine what consti-
tutes unlawful discrimination.
Censuses A population census is a complete count of all persons residing

in a particular area. A census differs from a population sample, which scientif-
ically selects a percentage of persons in an area in order to estimate character-
istics of the entire population of the territory.
To undertake a population census, census takers must identify the dwell-
ing units in the area to be covered; then they must go to each abode and ob-
tain information from all persons residing therein. Inevitably, census takers
miss some people because not everyone is at home when the census taker ar-
rives, some people choose to evade being counted, others are homeless or
transient, and not all dwelling units are easy to identify. Censuses, thus, gener-
ally undercount population, especially in areas where less affluent minorities
reside. That is why, some argue, a method known as “statistical sampling” may
be more accurate than an actual headcount, provided that the census has
identified all dwelling units.
Legal Requirements The Constitution of the United States requires a

population census every ten years. Because the Constitution requires that
each state’s representation in the federal House of Representatives be based
on population, a major purpose of the decennial census is to increase or de-
crease the number of seats in the House of Representatives apportioned to
each state in accordance with relative changes in the population of each state.
The Constitution did not consider Native Americans to be citizens of the
United States, so they were not originally counted in the census; those living
on reservations did not affect the allocation of seats in the House of Repre-
sentatives until after 1924, when they were granted American citizenship.
Those of African descent were counted in each state, but before the Civil War
(1861-1865), when they were not considered citizens, their number was mul-
tiplied by three-fifths for the purpose of reapportioning representation in the
House of Representatives.
Beginning during the 1960’s, affirmative action began to be applied to
remedy employment discrimination in the United States. One aspect of the
policy is that federal government employers and those with federal contracts
are supposed to hire men and women of the various ethnic or racial groups in
the same proportions as their relative availability in the workforce. To deter-
121
Censuses, U.S.
mine the composition of the workforce, employers usually rely on census

data, which are disseminated by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Ethnic/Racial Categories In the first federal census of 1790, each indi-

vidual was assigned membership in one of two racial groups: white and col-
ored. The colored population was divided into free colored and slaves, and
both categories were divided into black or mulatto. These census categories
were used until 1860, when the Asiatic category was added and a count was
made of the people in various Indian tribes. The 1870 census used four cate-
gories: white, colored, Chinese, and Indian. In 1880, Japanese became the
fifth category, and the term “Negro” replaced “colored.” These five catego-
ries remained on census reports through 1900. The 1910 census added sev-
eral new categories: Filipinos, Hindus, and Koreans. A footnote in the census
Census taker collecting information during the early twentieth century. Under the U.S . Constitu-
tion, the federal government is required to conduct a comprehensive census of the United States
every ten years. (Library of Congress)
122
Censuses, U.S.
report noted that Hindus were “Caucasians” but still were counted separately
from other categories of “whites.”
The 1920 census added Hawaiians and part Hawaiians, but these two cate-
gories were removed from the national enumeration in 1930 and 1940. Mexi-
cans joined the category list in 1930 and 1940. In 1950, the only racial catego-
ries were white and nonwhite. In 1960, six categories were used: “white,”
“Negro,” Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, and Indian. In 1970, Hawaiians and Ko-
reans returned to the list, making eight categories. In 1980, the category
“black” replaced “Negro,” and the list of Asian and Pacific races expanded to
include Asian Indians, Samoans, and Vietnamese. In 1990, nearly every coun-
try in Asia was represented as a separate category.
Although Mexicans appeared as a category in 1930 and 1940, they did not
reappear in national statistics for forty years. In 1970, the census counted
“Persons of Spanish Heritage,” but in 1980, the census counted Cubans, Mex-
icans, and Puerto Ricans separately. In 1990, the census reported the number
of persons from almost all countries in the Caribbean, Central America, and
South America.
Census reports on the territories of Alaska and Hawaii used unique cate-
gory schemes. For Alaska, the census counted Aleuts, Eskimos, and Alaskan
Indians; Aleuts and Eskimos became national categories in 1980 and 1990,
but Alaskan Indians were pooled with all other American Indians in both
years. For Hawaii, the indigenous Hawaiians were counted, although up to
1930, they were divided into pure Hawaiians, Asiatic Hawaiians, and white
Hawaiians.
From the beginning, the census had separate subcategories for European
ethnic groups (British, French, German, and so on), all of which were
counted as white. The breakdown was made to record the number of foreign-
born individuals in the population. Due to concerns among the earlier immi-
grants from western and northern Europe that too many eastern and south-
ern Europeans were arriving, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1924.
This act replaced a temporary immigration law, passed in 1921, which had re-
stricted immigrants to 3 percent of each admissible nationality residing in the
United States as of 1910.
According to the 1924 immigration act, known as the National Origins Act,
the maximum from each European country was calculated as 2 percent of the
nationality group already inside the United States as determined by the fed-
eral census of 1890. Most Asians, effectively, were barred from immigration
under the law with the exception of Filipinos, as the Philippines was an Amer-
ican possession as of 1898. The restrictive 1924 immigration law imposed no
quota on immigrants from the Western Hemisphere. With the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1965, Congress established equal quotas for all coun-
tries, regardless of hemisphere.
With the advent of affirmative action, a five-category scheme was devel-
oped by federal civil rights enforcement agencies. The so-called COINS cate-
gories stood for “Caucasian, Oriental, Indian, Negro, and Spanish.” Later, the
123
Censuses, U.S.
term “Oriental” was replaced by the term “Asian and Pacific islander,” and
the term “Hispanic” replaced the term “Spanish.”
Census for the Year 2000 During the 1990’s, considerable pressure was
brought to bear to change the categories for the census for the year 2000.
Some blacks wanted to be called “African Americans.” Hispanics wanted to be
counted as “Latinos” and as members of a race rather than an ethnic group.
Native Hawaiians wanted to be moved from the category “Asians and Pacific
islanders” and included with “American Indians and Native Alaskans.” Mid-
dle Easterners, particularly those from Islamic countries, wanted separate sta-
tus. Finally, some mixed-race or multiethnic people who spanned two or
more of the categories wanted to be counted as “multiracial.” Advocates of a
society in which ethnic and racial distinctions would not be recognized offi-
cially wanted to drop all references to race and ethnicity in the census.
After many hearings and studies on the subject, the U.S. Office of Manage-
ment and Budget decided to keep the previous categorizations with one mod-
ification: “Asians” would be counted separately from “Native Hawaiians and
Other Pacific islanders.” The proposal for a separate “multiracial” category
was rejected, but persons with multiracial backgrounds would be allowed to
check more than one category. Thus, data on ethnic backgrounds of people
in the United States have been collapsed into five racial categories: African
American or black, American Indian or Native Alaskan, Asian, Native Hawai-
ian or Other Pacific islander, and white. The census of the year 2000 permits a
member of any of these five categories to also check “Hispanic or Latino.”
Impact on Public Policy The ethnic and racial diversity of the United
States is best documented by the decennial federal census. The count of each
ethnic or racial group is crucial in determining whether discrimination oc-
curs, but questions about ethnic group membership or race on a census
deeply affect the identity of many persons, who in turn may support efforts ei-
ther to abolish ethnic and racial counts or to change categories.
Michael Haas
Further Reading
Anderson, Margo J. The American Census: A Social History. New Haven, Conn.:
Yale University Press, 1988. Historical account of the taking of censuses
that includes many of the associated controversies.
Choldin, Harvey M. Looking for the Last Percent: The Controversy over Census
Undercounts. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1994. Critical
study of the tendency of censuses to undercount minorities.
Kertzer, David I., and Dominique Arel, eds. Census and Identity: The Politics of
Race, Ethnicity, and Language in National Census. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 2002. Study of the counting of racial and ethnic minorities in
the U.S. Census.
124
Chicano movement
Perlmann, Joel, and Mary Waters, eds. The New Race Question: How the Census
Counts Multiracial Individuals. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002.
Collection of critical essays on the U.S. Census’s changing racial categories
and the social and political effects of these changes.
Rodriguez, Clara E. Changing Race: Latinos, the Census, and the History of Ethnic-
ity. New York: New York University Press, 2000. Study of the treatment of
ethnic minorities in the U.S. Census, with special attention to the counting
of Latinos.
Skerry, Peter. Counting on the Census? Race, Group Identity, and the Evasion of Pol-
itics. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000. Analytical study
of the problems of accurately counting members of racial and ethnic
groups in the U.S. Census.
Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2004-2005. 124th ed. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Census Bureau, 2005. Starting place for any research on demograph-
ics. Updated annually, this reference source is available on compact disc,
and much of its information is freely available online on the U.S. Census
Bureau’s Web site.
See also Demographics of immigration; European immigrants, 1790-

1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; Immigration “crisis”; Justice and im-
migration; Racial and ethnic demographic trends.
Chicano movement
The Event: Period of Mexican American cultural and political awakening
Date: 1960’s-1970’s
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Latino immigrants; Mexican

immigrants
Significance: During the era of the Chicano movement, Mexican Americans

defined and took pride in their own identity, asserted their civil rights, and
worked toward self-determination by improving their financial, social, and
political circumstances.
The Chicano movement began during the early 1960’s and peaked during
the early 1970’s. Many historians view the movement as a concise expression
of the Chicano perspective on the Mexican American community’s history.
Chicano history begins with the indigenous peoples of what is now Mexico
and the southwestern United States, proceeds with the Spanish conquest and
colonization and the Mexican War (1846-1848), and continues during the
subsequent expansion of European Americans into the American Southwest.
125
Chicano movement
Historical Background According to Chicano analysts, Chicanos are a

people who are indigenous to the Americas, originating from Aztlán, the Az-
tec homeland in Central and North America. After the Spanish conquest and
colonization in the sixteenth century of what is now Mexico and the Ameri-
can Southwest, Chicano culture became a blend of Indian and Spanish cus-
toms and practices. Although the Spanish attempted to suppress the indige-
nous culture, the Indians’ response to the influx of Spanish culture was to
practice accommodation, outwardly accepting their “inferior” status to ob-
tain concessions from the dominant group and occasionally rebelling.
In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, settlers from the United
States began to arrive in the Southwest, then part of Mexico. These settlers,
mostly of European ancestry, brought with them the concepts of white su-
premacy, patriarchy, Christianity, and capitalism. Under the 1848 Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican War, Mexicans who remained
in the new territories of the United States were designated as citizens with all
constitutional rights and guarantees; land acquired under Mexican law was to
be protected by U.S. law. However, by 1900, European Americans (called An-
glos by Chicano historians) had seized 95 percent of Mexican-owned land.
The Mexican way of life gradually was replaced by the lifestyle of the Anglo
settlers. Mexican farmers and ranchers were replaced by Anglos, who ran the
farms and ranches differently, often along more capitalistic and less paternal-
istic lines. Some of the ranchers viewed Mexican Americans primarily as a re-
serve workforce. Across the Southwest, American businesses, courts, and law
enforcement agencies replaced existing facilities. Schools were segregated; a
triple system separated Mexican Americans, African Americans, and Euro-
pean Americans.
From approximately 1900 to 1930, millions of Mexican citizens migrated
to the United States. Some fled to avoid the violent and economic disloca-
tions of the Mexican Revolution; others came to fill the U.S. labor shortage
caused by economic growth in industry and agriculture. Communities in the
Southwest that historically had contained many Mexican Americans and in-
dustrial cities in the Midwest became destinations for those seeking employ-
ment, and migrant trails of Mexican and Mexican American workers devel-
oped throughout the United States.
Changing Generations During the 1930’s, the political and nationalistic

loyalties of members of the Mexican American community underwent pro-
found change. The Mexican immigrants who arrived from 1900 to 1930 often
did not think of themselves as citizens of the United States because of Mex-
ico’s geographic proximity and the ease of returning to their native country.
Discrimination and anti-Mexican attitudes also made it hard for them to feel
a part of their adopted country. However, in the post-World War I era, as mil-
lions of migrants moved into Mexican American communities and the U.S.-
born generation began to grow up, more of the migrants began to think of
themselves as Mexican Americans.
126
Chicano movement
The Great Depression of 1930 resulted in the deportation of many Mexi-

can immigrants. From 1930 to 1937, U.S. law officials and political authorities
deported approximately 500,000 Mexican people (250,000 of whom were
children born in the United States and therefore American citizens). The de-
portation demonstrates how many Americans viewed Mexican immigrants: as
inexpensive and exploitable labor to be disposed of in times of economic dis-
tress.
This negative perception persisted even after World War II. From 1942
through 1945, several hundred thousand Mexican Americans were active in
combat zones; several received the highest military honors. When the war
ended and the veterans returned home, they discovered that their sacrifices
had minimal effect on prewar attitudes toward and policies and structures af-
fecting Mexican Americans. However, these veterans no longer accepted the
status quo, and they joined with members of the community who had already
rejected the ideas of gradualism and assimilation.
From 1946 through 1963, Mexican American veterans, believing in the
American ideal of equality and equal opportunity and having proved their pa-
triotism and loyalty, created new organizations to address what they perceived
to be barriers to their reform-oriented strategies. However, despite these or-
ganizations’ numerous successful efforts against economic, political, and so-
cial discrimination (including the legal defeat of the triple school system and
a significant role in helping elect John F. Kennedy to the U.S. presidency),
many members of the Mexican American community became disillusioned at
the lack of substantive improvement for communities and individuals. The
most prominent problems were the continued exploitation of agricultural
workers, immigration issues, low levels of educational achievement, and lim-
ited economic opportunities.
Chicano Generation In the Southwest, many Mexican Americans, partic-

ularly young people, began to reexamine their identity, especially their expe-
rience as a mestizo (mixed race) people in a culture and society dominated by
white European Americans. The election in 1963 of five Mexican Americans to
the town council of Crystal City, Texas, a town where the majority of the popu-
lation was Mexican American, marked the birth of a new political generation.
This new generation rejected European Americans’ definition of “Mexican
American”; they saw themselves as Chicanos, an indigenous people with roots
in the Aztec homeland of Aztlán and possessing their own mestizo culture.
The word chicano was appropriated from the denigratory use of “Mexi-
cano” by whites who had stereotyped Mexican immigrants and citizens alike
as lazy and dirty. Chicano came to connote ethnic pride, a defiant turning of
the old hate language on its head. Members of the Chicano movement felt
that to continue the previous (Mexican American) generation’s strategy of
reform was to practice accommodation and might even constitute an accep-
tance of European American constructions and a rejection of their mestizo-
indigenous history.
127
Chicano movement
“Chicano”
The origin of the term “Chicano” is uncertain; however, some experts believe
that the word originated from an improper pronunciation or slang version of
“Mexicano.” Consequently, the user was viewed by middle-class Mexicans or
Mexican Americans as uneducated, poor, and probably “Indian,” a pejorative
appellation from those of Mexican origin who rejected their indigenous roots.
In the Chicano critique of Anglo society, the rejection of Anglo racial and
ethnocentric designations also included the repudiation of those in Mexicano
communities who accepted anti-Native American and capitalist belief systems.
To call the self Chicano is to affirm that which is denounced by Anglo-created
racial constructs and ethnocentric depictions. To be Chicano is to affirm and
proclaim historic, indigenous origins and to understand that Chicano culture
has Spanish-Indian roots in a land invaded and conquered by the European
Americans.
Four individuals form the core of the Chicano generation and movement:
José Ángel Gutiérrez, Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzáles, Reies López Tijerina, and
César Chávez. During the 1960’s, Gutiérrez of South Texas organized young
Chicanos into the Mexican American Youth Organization, which emphasized
their right to cultural self-determination and had the development of bilin-
gual/bicultural education for all Mexican American children as one of its
principal goals.
In 1965, Gonzáles founded the Crusade for Justice in Denver, Colorado, to
improve education, job opportunities, and police relations for Chicanos. He
also organized the first Chicano Youth Liberation Conference in 1969, which
brought together representatives from a number of Chicano organizations.
At the first conference, the delegates adopted El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán, a
manifesto of political and cultural nationalism. Tijerina of New Mexico
formed La Alianza Federal de Mercedes in 1963 in an effort to reclaim land
he and many Chicanos felt had been taken from the Mexican owners in viola-
tion of the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. He led a 1967 raid on the
courthouse in Tierra Amarilla, New Mexico. Chávez, probably the best-known
Chicano activist, led farmworkers in Delano, California, on a strike that devel-
oped into a grape boycott and lasted from 1965 to 1970. In many ways during
these early years, the Chicano movement was integrated with Chávez’s call for
migrant farmworkers’ rights because a huge proportion of the farmworkers
were, and remain, Mexican or Mexican American.
These four men were the impetus for the Chicano movement and the core
of its activities. Their concerns— improving the financial, social, and political
status of Mexican Americans, gaining the respect due to Mexican Americans,
claiming the right to self-determination, and building Chicano pride—were
echoed in the goals of the many other Chicano organizations that were
formed during the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. These and later organizations
deal with additional issues such as the distinction between illegal workers and
128
Chicano movement
immigrants, legal problems involving the use of the Spanish language, the
lack of mestizo-Chicano peoples in American history instruction, police bru-
tality, lack of health and education services, lack of education, and structural
poverty.
The final politicization of the Chicano generation grew out of the Vietnam
War. Many Chicanos saw the overrepresentation of Mexican Americans in the
combat zones of Vietnam as proof of the veracity of the Chicano view of Euro-
pean American society and as a further betrayal of Mexican American World
War II veterans’ beliefs and sacrifices. The Vietnam War and the older and
younger generations’ differing feelings about it produced great tension within
Mexican American communities; some older Mexican Americans were com-
pelled to question and adjust their basic beliefs about patriotism and reform.
The 1970 Chicano Moratorium was the largest Chicano antiwar demonstra-
tion and also the most violent police riot involving Chicano protesters.
All of these events, issues, and concerns fueled an attempt by Gutiérrez
and others to organize a national political party, La Raza Unida, during the
early 1970’s. Although some of the party’s local efforts favorably altered polit-
ical relations between Chicanos and European Americans, the party was not
successful at the national level. After 1975, the Chicano movement no longer
was a cohesive force in Mexican American communities, although Chávez’s
widow, Helen Chávez, continued his leadership of the fight for the rights of
farm laborers. However, during its heyday, the Chicano movement did en-
gage a new generation of Mexican Americans with a much more compre-
hensive and complete vision and understanding of the Mexican American/
Chicano experience in the United States.
Carl Allsup
Further Reading Rodolfo Acina’s Occupied America: The Chicano Struggle

for Liberation (2d ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1976) presents the Chicano
perspective on the Mexican American experience. Mario Barrera’s Race and
Class in the Southwest: A Theory of Racial Inequality (Notre Dame: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1976) looks at both class and race. Arnoldo de Leon’s They
Called Them Greasers: Anglo Attitudes Toward Mexicans in Texas, 1821-1900 (Aus-
tin: University of Texas Press, 1980) offers a history of the development of
racial and ethnocentric constructs by European American society. David Mon-
tejano’s Anglos and Mexicans in the Making of Texas, 1836-1986 (Austin: Univer-
sity of Texas Press, 1987) demonstrates the complex interaction of race, eth-
nicity, and class and the evolving response by Mexican Americans toward
European Americans’ efforts to control Mexican American people. Alam-
brista and the U.S.-Mexico Border: Film, Music, and Stories of Undocumented Immi-
grants (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2004), edited by Nich-
olas J. Cull and David Carrasco, is a collection of essays on dramatic works,
United States.
129
Chinatowns
See also Bracero program; Farmworkers’ union; Latinos; Latinos and em-
ployment; Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Mexican
deportations during the Depression; Operation Wetback; Undocumented
workers.
Chinatowns
Definition: Ethnic enclaves outside traditional Chinese homelands in which
Chinese immigrants are concentrated
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Demograph-

ics; Ethnic enclaves
Significance: Chinatowns can be found in almost every major city with a

high clustering of Chinese throughout Southeast Asia, South and North
America, Europe, and Oceania.
The first significant Chinatown to emerge in the United States arose in San
Francisco. It began to take shape in 1850 as large numbers of Chinese immi-
grants were lured there by the California gold rush. Initially called Little Can-
Entrance to modern Los Angeles’s Chinatown, which is a popular tourist attraction. (David Fowler)
130
Chinatowns
Corner of Clay Street and Grant Avenue in San Francisco’s Chinatown in 1927. Almost every ma-
jor American city had a “Chinatown,” but San Francisco’s was to Chinese immigrants the one true
center of Chinese culture in America. They called it Tangrenbu, the “port of the people of Tang.”
Grant Avenue was used as the title of a song in Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein’s musical
about Chinatown, Flower Drum Song (1958). (Library of Congress)
ton, it was christened Chinatown by the press in 1853. In the next several de-
cades, more than two dozen Chinatowns were established in mining areas,
railroad towns, farming communities, and cities of California, as well as in Ne-
vada, Utah, Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
As the Chinese diaspora accelerated, especially after the 1882 Chinese Exclu-
sion Act, Chinatowns gradually emerged in New York, Boston, Chicago, Phila-
delphia, Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Maryland, and other cities.
The formation of Chinatowns in the United States was an outcome of both
voluntary and involuntary forces. In a foreign land and with language barri-
ers, the Chinese needed their own communities for information sharing, life-
131
Chinatowns
style preservation, business transactions, cultural maintenance, kinship net-

working, and psychological support. Externally, hostility and violence against
the Chinese, housing and employment discrimination, and institutional ex-
clusion forced them to establish their own enclaves for self-protection and
survival.
Over time, some Chinatowns have survived and continued to grow, whereas
other Chinatowns, such as Pittsburgh’s, have faded. Many important demo-
graphic, economic, social, and geographical factors have contributed to the
growth or decline of a Chinatown, including the size of the city in which the
Chinatown is located; the number of Chinese residents in the city; the sex and
age distribution of the Chinese population in the Chinatown; the demand for
Chinese labor in the area; the demand of the Chinese in the Chinatown for
goods and services; the continuation of new Chinese immigration and settle-
ment into the Chinatown; land-use patterns and land values in the China-
town and its surrounding areas; changes in the socioeconomic status of Chi-
nese residents; relationships between the Chinese and other groups; and
adaptation strategies of the Chinatown.
During the 1990’s, there were more than two dozen Chinatowns in the
United States, of which New York’s Chinatown was the largest. Modern
Chinatowns have been transformed into tourist centers and Chinese shop-
ping bazaars. They also serve as living Chinese communities, Chinese cultural
meccas, commercial cores, suppliers of employment and entrepreneurial op-
portunities, historical education hubs, and symbolic power bases for political
office holders and seekers. Nevertheless, there is some evidence that injustice
and the exploitation of new Chinese immigrants also take place in some
Chinatowns. Despite the existence of the three types of traditional social or-
ganizations in Chinatowns (huiguan or district associations, zu or clans, and
tongs or secret societies), they have much less influence on the lives of Chi-
nese residents than they did in the past.
Historically, all Chinatowns were located in urban centers, and residents
tended to have a lower socioeconomic status. However, during the late
1970’s, the first suburban Chinatown emerged in Monterey Park, located east
of Los Angeles. Also dubbed the Chinese Beverly Hills or Little Taipei, it is
home to mainly middle-class people. Chinese Americans are the dominant
economic, social, and cultural force in the city. In November of 1983, Mon-
terey Park elected the first Chinese American woman mayor, Lily Lee Chen.
There are signs that suburban Chinatowns are multiplying in the San Gabriel
Valley east of Los Angeles and in Silicon Valley, south of San Francisco, and
they are likely to grow in the foreseeable future as a result of an influx of high-
status Chinese immigrants.
Philip Q. Yang
Further Reading
Chen, Shehong. Being Chinese, Becoming Chinese American. Urbana: University
of Illinois Press, 2002.
132
Chinese American Citizens Alliance
Guest, Kenneth J. God in Chinatown: Religion and Survival in New York’s Evolving
Immigrant Community. New York: New York University Press, 2003.
Kwong, Peter. Chinatown, New York: Labor and Politics, 1930-1950. Rev. ed. New
York: New Press, 2001.
Ling, Huping. Chinese St. Louis: From Enclave to Cultural Community. Philadel-
phia: Temple University Press, 2004.
Ma, L. Eve Armentrout. Hometown Chinatown: The History of Oakland’s Chinese
Community. New York: Garland, 2000.
Shah, Nayan. Contagious Divides: Epidemics and Race in San Francisco’s China-
town. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
Wong, William. Oakland’s Chinatown. Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia, 2004.
Zinzius, Birgit. Chinese America: Stereotype and Reality—History, Present, and Fu-
ture of the Chinese Americans. New York: P. Lang, 2005.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Chinese immigrants; Chinese immi-

grants and family customs; Ethnic enclaves; Little Havana; Little Italies; Little
Tokyos.
Chinese American Citizens

Alliance
Identification: Chinese American rights advocacy organization
Place: San Francisco, California
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Civil rights and

liberties
Significance: The Chinese American Citizens Alliance became a major so-

cial and political force in the Chinese American community.
Chinese immigrants began arriving in the United States during the mid-
nineteenth century. Most of the immigrants were young men who left their
families behind in China and who intended to return home after they se-
cured sufficient money to support their families comfortably. To secure pas-
sage to the United States, most of them indentured themselves to merchants
or labor agents in a system called the credit-ticket arrangement whereby mer-
chants advanced Chinese money for passage to the United States and kept
collecting payments for years. Some Chinese left less willingly, emigrating be-
cause of famine and political and social unrest in southern China or falling
victim to the so-called “Pig Trade,” which replaced slavery after it was out-
133
lawed following the Civil War. They chose the United States because of exag-
gerated tales of wealth and opportunity spread by traders and missionaries.
Chinatowns Formed After the Chinese immigrants landed in the United

States, labor agents, under the credit-ticket arrangement, gained almost com-
plete domination of their indentured workers and kept them in isolated com-
munities that became known as Chinatowns. Many Chinese ultimately were
unable to secure sufficient money for return passage to China; however, be-
cause they did not want to remain permanently in the United States, they had
little incentive to assimilate. Their unwillingness or inability to become accul-
turated into the American “melting pot” became an indictment against all
Chinese.
Contemporary newspaper illustration of the anti-Chinese rioting in Denver, Colorado, in 1880. (Li-
brary of Congress)
134
Editorial cartoon by J . A. Wales commenting on the convergence of anti-Chinese policies of the

Democratic and Republican Parties in 1880. (Library of Congress)
Life in California during the late ninteenth century was difficult at best
for most Chinese. The Chinese communities organized huiguan (merchant
guilds) that served as welcoming committees, resettlement assistance ser-
vices, and mutual help societies for newly arrived immigrants. Chinese immi-
grants were also organized by the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Associa-
tion (the Chinese Six Companies), originally agents of Chinese firms in
Hong Kong that had established the “coolie trade” to San Francisco. The Six
Companies kept traditional Chinese rules, customs, and values as the basis
for appropriate behavior, helping protect Chinese from an increasingly anti-
Chinese atmosphere.
Violence—External and Internal Anti-Chinese sentiments and vio-

lence against Chinese began almost as soon as they arrived in North America.
These attitudes existed at the top levels of government and labor unions as
well as being held by local citizens. During the mid- to late nineteenth cen-
135
tury, various political parties, including the Know-Nothing Party, the Demo-
cratic Party, and the Republican Party, promoted anti-Chinese platforms.
During this time, workers’ unions organized anti-Chinese activities, and anti-
Asian sentiments were propagated by newspapers in western states.
In 1871, twenty Chinese in Los Angeles were killed and their homes and
businesses looted and burned. In 1877, a similar incident occurred in San
Francisco. In Chico, California, five farmers were murdered. Anti-Chinese ri-
ots broke out in Denver, Colorado, and in Rock Springs, Wyoming. In 1885,
Chinese workers, employed as strikebreakers, were killed at a Wyoming coal
mine. Chinese residents in Seattle and Tacoma, Washington, were driven out
of town, and thirty-one Chinese were robbed and murdered in Snake River,
Oregon. In 1905, sixty-seven labor organizations, in order to prevent employ-
ers from hiring Asians, formed the Asiatic Exclusion League.
During the early 1890’s, the Chinese Six Companies influenced Chinese
not to sign documents required by the Geary Act (1892), an extension of the
Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which required all Chinese residing in the
United States to obtain certificates of eligibility with a photograph within a
year. When the Geary Act was ruled legal, thousands of Chinese Americans
became illegal aliens in the United States. The tongs, secret societies of crimi-
nals that originated in China, used this opportunity to take control of the
Chinatowns. The result was a vicious and bloody civil war among Chinese
Americans. Few first-generation Chinese Americans actively opposed the rule
of the tongs.
Native Sons of the Golden State Many young American-born (second-

generation) Chinese opposed these “old ways” of doing things. They ac-
cepted the idea that they were never going to return to China and wanted to
adopt American ways and fit into American culture. These young, second-
generation Chinese formed the Native Sons of the Golden State in San Fran-
cisco in an effort to assimilate into American mainstream culture. The Native
Sons of the Golden State emphasized the importance of naturalization and
voters’ registration. All members were urged to become American citizens
and to vote. The organization also encouraged active participation in the
civic affairs of mainstream American life. The leaders thought that some of
the anti-Chinese sentiments and discriminatory actions were, in part, caused
by the traditional attitudes and behaviors of the Chinese immigrants who re-
mained isolated, did not learn English, and did not take part in politics.
As the organization grew, it established chapters in Oakland, Los Angeles,
San Diego, Chicago, Portland, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Boston, eventually
changing its name to the Chinese American Citizens Alliance (CACA). In
1913, CACA defeated a California law designed to prevent Chinese from vot-
ing. The group fought against the National Origins Act and sought the right
for Chinese men to bring their wives to the United States. CACA helped de-
feat the Cinch bill of 1925, which attempted to regulate the manufacture and
sale of Chinese medicinal products such as herbs and roots. By promoting nu-
136
merous social functions, CACA also helped keep Chinese American commu-
nities together and moved them toward assimilation. CACA fought against
the stereotyped portrayals of Chinese in films, newspapers, and magazines as
heathens, drug addicts, or instigators of torture. In 1923, for example, the or-
ganization attempted to block publication of a book by Charles R. Shepard,
The Ways of Ah Sin, depicting negative images of Chinese. CACA has also sup-
ported other community organizations, such as Cameron House, Self-Help
for the Elderly, and the Chinese Historical Society of America.
Gregory A. Levitt
Further Reading
book. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 2005. General reference work on
Asian American political activism.
Chung, Sue Fawn. “The Chinese American Citizens Alliance: An Effort in As-
similation.” Los Angeles: University of California, 1965. An unpublished
doctoral dissertation, a rare secondary source devoted entirely to the orga-
nization.
Daniels, Roger. Asian America: Chinese and Japanese in the United States Since
1850. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988. Excellent overall ac-
count of Asian America that includes a brief description of the Chinese
American Citizens Alliance.
Dillon, Richard H. The Hatchet Men: The Story of the Tong Wars in San Francisco
Chinatown. New York: Coward-McCann, 1962. A dated but interesting ac-
count of the violence in San Francisco’s early Chinatown under the rule of
the tongs.
Lai, H. Mark. Becoming Chinese American: A History of Communities and Institu-
tions. Walnut Creek, Calif.: AltaMira, 2004. Study of cultural adaptations of
Chinese immigrants to the United States. Includes chapters on Chinese
cultural and rights advocacy organizations.
Takaki, Ronald. Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans.
Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. An account of Asians coming to live in Amer-
ica. Provides some discussion of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance
during the 1940’s and the late 1980’s.
See also Chinatowns; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases;

Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Chi-
nese immigrants and family customs; Chinese Six Companies.
137
Chinese detentions in New York
Chinese detentions in
New York
The Event: When a Thai ship carrying 276 illegal émigrés from mainland
China grounded off New York, federal authorities took the would-be immi-
grants into custody and prosecuted those responsible for transporting
them to the United States
Date: June 6, 1993
Place: Rockaway Peninsula, Queens, New York
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Border control; Chinese immigrants
Significance: The federal government successfully prosecuted the persons

responsible for attempting to smuggle unauthorized immigrants into the
United States in this highly publicized case; however, the incident merely
called attention to the fact that tens of thousands of Chinese immigrants
were entering the country illegally during the early 1990’s.
In the early morning hours of June 6, 1993, the Golden Venture, a 150-foot
freighter, ran aground in the Atlantic Ocean a quarter of a mile off the coast
of Queens, New York. On board were 285 Chinese people, most of them from
China’s southern coastal province of Fujian, who were attempting to enter
the United States without proper authorization. The ship had left Bangkok,
Thailand, in February, crossing both the Indian and Atlantic oceans before
reaching the United States.
In the course of the arduous trip, at least five of the émigrés were thought
to have contracted tuberculosis. Living conditions on board were squalid.
Each passenger was given only one bottle of water a week and one meal a day,
consisting primarily of rice.
The Golden Venture arrived in U.S. waters in May but, after two attempts, was
unable to connect with the smaller ships that were to smuggle the Chinese
passengers ashore. On May 17, an agent of New York’s Fuk Ching gang, which
ran the smuggling operation, wrested control of the freighter from its crew of
seven Burmese and six Indonesians. In an act of desperation, the Golden Ven-
ture was purposely permitted to run aground on June 6.
As the ship foundered fifteen hundred feet off the New York coast, some of
its human cargo dived into the cold water, attempting to swim through six-
foot waves to the shore. A rescue effort involving hundreds of police officers,
firefighters, and members of the Coast Guard was launched immediately.
The rescuers were shocked by the appalling sanitary conditions aboard the
grounded ship.
By the time the rescue was completed, six of the Chinese émigrés had
drowned. Of those remaining, 276 were remanded to the custody of the Im-
138
Chinese detentions in New York
migration and Naturalization Service (INS) and dispatched to detention cen-

ters to await hearings on their requests for asylum. The INS announced its op-
position to granting these requests.
Illegal Chinese Immigration Illegal immigration from China to the

United States has occurred for more than a century, particularly from the
southern province of Fujian, home of the Chinese aliens aboard the Golden
Venture. As early as the 1849 gold rush in California, crime syndicates in China
lured people to the United States with promises of wealth and virtually limit-
less possibilities.
The system used in those early days differed little from the system em-
ployed by the current syndicates. They offer transportation to the United
States, housing and jobs for people after they arrive, forged documents, and
virtual immunity from deportation. In return, those who leave China pay a
substantial down payment of the syndicate’s fees and sign agreements to
pay the remainder from the money they expect to earn upon arriving in New
York City, San Francisco, or one of the other popular destinations for illegal
aliens.
Once they reach their destinations, the Chinese usually realize that they
have been deceived. They frequently work long hours in sweatshops, often
for as little as a dollar an hour. Their income is barely enough to cover their
living expenses, let alone repay the syndicate quickly and save enough money
to bring other family members to the United States. They live in a condition
of indentured servitude as virtual slaves, but they can do little to help them-
selves because of their tenuous legal status in the country.
An estimated fifty thousand to eighty thousand illegal Chinese aliens were
smuggled into the United States each year during the late 1980’s and early
1990’s, paying fees of between $20,000 and $35,000 each. Only about 10 per-
cent of these immigrants are apprehended by the INS and returned to China.
In essence, then, the syndicates honor their claims of succeeding in helping
people to escape from China. The rate of defection from China accelerated
sharply in the years following the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989.
Illegal immigration to the United States from China far exceeds such im-
migration from most other countries. Chinese immigrants enter the country
by land, sea, and air. Some are smuggled into Mexico and make their way over
the U.S.-Mexico border.
On July 6, 1993, the U.S. Coast Guard stopped three ships smuggling a to-
tal of 658 Chinese nationals, mostly young men, in international waters off
Mexico’s northern coast. Mexican immigration officials finally permitted
these three dilapidated ships to dock in the Pacific port city of Ensenada,
where the immigrants were held in custody. Eventually they were returned to
China in a chartered Mexican jet aircraft. Crew members of these three ships
were arrested and charged with violations of Mexican immigration laws. Most
of the crew members of the Golden Venture were charged with violating Ameri-
can immigration laws.
139
Chinese Exclusion Act
Consequences An immediate consequence of the grounding of the Golden

Venture was that nine crew members of the vessel were tried and convicted of
smuggling. On December 3, 1993, they were each sentenced by the U.S. Dis-
trict Court in New York City to six months of imprisonment. These arrests and
convictions did not, however, strike at the heart of the problem, the crime
syndicates behind the smuggling.
On August 27, 1993, Guo Liang Chi, leader of New York’s Fuk Ching gang,
was arrested in Hong Kong. That gang was thought to have been involved in
the Golden Venture debacle. Charged in the January deaths of two of his New
York accomplices, Guo Liang Chi faced extradition to the United States. The
following day, federal investigators arrested fourteen other Fuk Ching gang
members in New York City on charges of conspiring to smuggle immigrants,
kidnapping, and extortion.
R. Baird Shuman
Further Reading
Staeger, Rob. Deported Aliens. Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004.
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Chinese immigrants; Coast Guard, U.S.; Ille-
gal aliens; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Justice and immigration.

The Law: Federal law restricting Asian immigration
Date: May 6, 1882
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Citizenship

and naturalization; Discrimination; Laws and treaties; Nativism and racism
Significance: The Chinese Exclusion Act was the first federal effort to ex-
clude immigrants by race and nationality; it marked a turning point in
what had been, until then, an open door to immigrants from around the
world.
The Chinese Exclusion Act suspended immigration by Chinese laborers to

the United States for a period of ten years and prohibited Chinese residents
in the United States from becoming naturalized citizens. Merchants, stu-
dents, and tourists, however, were still permitted to enter the United States
for visits. Although the Chinese Exclusion Act was established as a tempo-
140
rary suspension of immigration

by Chinese laborers, it was only
the first of many laws designed to
exclude Asians from entry into
the United States.
This law was both a political
and social reaction to increasing
non-European immigration in the
second half of the nineteenth cen-
tury. As the country became more
industrialized and its frontier be-
gan to disappear, Americans be-
came increasingly apprehensive
Federal government photograph of Sun Yat-sen, the
about employment and the role future first president of the Republic of China, that
of immigrants. American labor or- was made during his 1909-1910 visit to the United
ganizations objected to what they States. The photograph was kept in a file relating to
perceived as unfair competition Sun’s entry into the United States under the restric-
by Chinese laborers. tions of the Chinese Exclusion Act. (NARA)
Background Chinese immigration to the mainland United States began

in earnest after the Taiping Rebellion in 1848. Most Chinese immigrants
headed for California, where the gold rush of 1849 led to an increased need
for labor. In 1854, 13,100 Chinese came to the United States. This immigra-
tion, regulated by the Burlingame Treaty in 1868, was unrestricted; by 1880,
the number of immigrants had risen to 105,465. The majority remained in
California, where they were hired as laborers by the railroads, worked as do-
mestics, and opened small businesses. San Francisco was the port of entry for
many Chinese; the population of its Chinatown grew from two thousand to
twelve thousand between 1860 and 1870.
The size and nature of this early Chinese immigration brought a long-
lasting prejudice. Californians thought of Chinese laborers as “coolies”—that
is, as cheap labor brought to the United States to undercut wages for Ameri-
can workers. Chinese workers were also accused of being dirty. Authorities in
San Francisco suspected that crowded areas of Chinatown were the focus for
disease and passed the Cubic Air Ordinance, prohibiting rental of a room
with fewer than five hundred cubic feet of space per person. This municipal
ordinance was later declared unconstitutional.
Discrimination and violence increased during the 1870’s. In 1871, a mob
attacked and killed nineteen Chinese people in Los Angeles. Dennis Kear-
ney, a naturalized citizen from Ireland, organized the Workingmen’s Party in
1877 to oppose Chinese immigrants. Shouting, “The Chinese must go!” Kear-
ney threatened violence to all Chinese immigrants. In July, 1877, men from
an “anti-coolie club” led workers into San Francisco’s Chinatown on a ram-
page that lasted several days.
Because most local ordinances against the Chinese had been declared un-
141
constitutional, people who opposed Chinese immigration turned to Con-

gress for new legislation. Congress responded in 1879 with a bill to limit Chi-
nese immigration by prohibiting ships from bringing more than fifteen
Chinese immigrants at a time. The bill was vetoed by President Rutherford B.
Hayes on the grounds that it violated the Burlingame Treaty. With popular
sentiment against continuing Chinese immigration, however, the treaty was
amended in 1880, allowing the United States to limit the number of Chinese
immigrants.
Exclusionary Legislation The Chinese Exclusion Act was a response to

the intensity of anti-Chinese feelings in the West and to close political elec-
tions that made western electoral votes critical. As signed into law by Presi-
dent Chester A. Arthur, the act suspended immigration by Chinese laborers
for ten years. The vote in the House of Representatives reflected the popular-
Contemporary editorial cartoon depicting president Rutherford B . Hayes standing on an ice drift
representing the United States as he vetoes the Chinese Exclusion bill of California senator Denis
Kearney, who is shown standing a piece of the ice drift (“Kearneyfornee”) that is breaking away
from the United States. (Library of Congress)
142
ity of the measure. There were 201 votes in favor, 37 against, and 51 absent.
Representatives from every section of the country supported the bill, with
southern and western House members voting unanimously for the legisla-
tion.
Later laws were even more draconian. An amendment in 1884 excluded all
Chinese and Chinese residents living in other countries from entering the
United States except as students, merchants, or tourists. The Scott Act of 1888
prohibited outright the entry of Chinese laborers and denied reentry to
those who traveled abroad, even if they held reentry visas. The law also placed
additional restrictions on those who were still permitted to come to the
United States. In 1892 the Geary Act extended for an additional ten years the
exclusion of Chinese immigrants, prohibited the use of habeas corpus by Chi-
nese residents in the United States if arrested, and required all Chinese peo-
ple to register and provide proof of their eligibility to remain in the United
States. The act was renewed in 1902, and Congress made permanent the ex-
clusion of Chinese immigrant laborers in 1904.
These exclusionary laws reflected a bias in American attitudes toward im-
migration by non-Europeans and increasing racial discrimination. Restric-
tions on intermarriage and land ownership by Chinese in many western states
during the early nineteenth century led to a reduction in the number of Chi-
nese residing in the United States from more than 100,000 in 1890 to 61,639
by 1920.
On December 17, 1943, the Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed. By then
the threat of competition by Chinese labor was no longer an issue, and China
was an ally of the United States in the war with Japan.
James A. Baer
Further Reading
Study of the interrelationships among African Americans, Chinese immi-
grants, and European Americans in the United States during the mid-nine-
teenth century, up until the time of the Chinese Exclusion Act.
Barth, Gunther. Bitter Strength: A History of the Chinese in the United States, 1850-
1870. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964. Although it does
not treat events after 1870, this book is important to an understanding of
anti-Chinese sentiment in California.
Chan, Sucheng, ed. Entry Denied: Exclusion and the Chinese Community in Amer-
ica, 1882-1943. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991. Explores the
legal ramifications of the Exclusion Act and the act’s effects on Chinese
who were living in the United States.
Lee, Erika. At America’s Gates: Chinese Immigration During the Exclusion Era,
1882-1943. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Study of
immigration from China to the United States from the time of the Chinese
143
Chinese exclusion cases
Exclusion Act to the loosening of American immigration laws during the

1960’s, with an afterward on U.S. immigration policies after the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001.
LeMay, Michael C. From Open Door to Dutch Door: An Analysis of U.S. Immigration
Policy Since 1820. New York: Praeger, 1987. Examines underlying causes of
the anti-immigration movement in the United States in response to Euro-
pean and Chinese immigration since 1820.
wood Press, 1999. General history of changing American immigration leg-
islation.
Chinese, 1785-1882. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Coun-
tering Coolidge’s argument of an economic basis for the Exclusion Act, ar-
gues that racism was at the root of Californian and U.S. hostility toward
Chinese immigrants.
gration Before Exclusion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999. Study of
the special problems faced by female Chinese immigrants in the years lead-
ing up to the Chinese Exclusion Act.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001. Scholarly study of chang-
ing federal immigration laws from the late nineteenth through the late
twentieth centuries, with particular attention to changing quota systems
and exclusionary policies.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Burlingame Treaty; Chinatowns;

Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese exclusion cases; Chinese immi-
grants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Chinese immigrants
and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; Immigration Act of
1943; Migration; Page law; Wong Kim Ark case; “Yellow peril” campaign.

The Cases: Six U.S. Supreme Court rulings (Chew Heong v. United States;
United States v. Jung Ah Lung; Chae Chan Ping v. United States; Fong Yue Ting v.
United States; Wong Quan v. United States; and Lee Joe v. United States) address-
ing issues raised by the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882
Dates: 1884-1893
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Court cases;

Discrimination; Nativism and racism
144
Significance: Using the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court first

ruled in favor of challenges to laws excluding the Chinese from immigrat-
ing and becoming U.S. citizens, then succumbed to popular sentiment
and upheld exclusionary statutes.
In 1882 Congress enacted the first Chinese Exclusion Act, prohibiting Chinese
laborers and miners from entering the United States. An 1884 amendment
required resident Chinese laborers to have reentry certificates if they traveled
outside the United States and planned to return. The 1888 Scott Act prohib-
ited Chinese laborers temporarily abroad from returning, thereby stranding
thousands of Chinese. Merchants and teachers were exempted from the Scott
Act if they had “proper papers,” thereby beginning the practice of using “pa-
per names” to create new identities so that Chinese could return. The 1892
Geary Act banned all future Chinese laborers from entry and denied bail to
Chinese in judicial proceedings. All Chinese faced deportation if they did not
carry identification papers. The 1893 McCreary Act further extended the defi-
nition of laborers to include fisher-
men, miners, laundry owners, and
merchants. The 1902 Chinese Ex-
clusion Act permanently banned
all Chinese immigration.
The Supreme Court initially at-
tempted to defend Chinese rights
under the Fourteenth Amendment;
however, as anti-Chinese sentiment
grew more pronounced, the Court
withdrew even its limited protec-
tions from Chinese immigrants. The
Court defended the right of Chi-
nese to reenter the United States
in Chew Heong and Jung Ah Lung. In
Chae Chan Ping, it found the Scott
Act unconstitutional. However, in
the three 1893 cases, it upheld a
law retroactively requiring that Chi-
nese laborers have certificates of
residence or be deported.
Richard L. Wilson
Reentry documents carried by a Chinese immi-
Further Reading grant in 1891. Under an amendment to the Chi-
Chan, Sucheng, ed. Entry Denied: nese Exclusion Act of 1882, Chinese immigrants
Exclusion and the Chinese Commu- wishing to visit their homeland were denied reen-
nity in America, 1882-1943. Phila- try to the United States if they failed to secure
delphia: Temple University Press, such documents before returning to China. (Na-
1991. tional Archives)
145
Chinese immigrants
1882-1943. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.

Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese immi-
and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; Immigration Act of
1943; Migration; Page law; Wong Kim Ark case; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Chinese immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from mainland China
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Demographics
Significance: The Chinese first came to the United States as laborers during
the early to mid-nineteenth century, finding considerable prejudice and
discrimination, which diminished after World War II.
Chinese people began to immigrate to the United States in 1820, but their
numbers remained small until the late 1840’s, when the decaying empire of
China was defeated in 1848 by Great Britain in the First Opium War. In 1849,
gold was discovered in California, and the gold rush began. When word of the
gold rush reached Canton, in the southeastern province of Kwangtung, many
Cantonese peasants, who had made their living as laborers, farmers, and fish-
ermen for centuries, began to leave their impoverished homeland for the
chance of riches just across the Pacific.
According to U.S. Census figures, 1,477,680 people immigrated to the
United States from China between 1820 and 2003. During the first three years
of the twenty-first century, Chinese immigrants continued to enter the coun-
try at a rate of about 48,000 persons per year. According to the 1990 U.S. Cen-
sus, Americans of Chinese ancestry from China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan
numbered more than 1,700,000 persons.
Most of these early Chinese immigrants worked with exceptional dili-
gence, industry, and enterprise and led a reticent existence in the mining
camps and cities. These positive qualities earned the early Chinese immi-
grants acceptance among the California business community. Although their
appearance set them apart from the rest of the townspeople, they were
warmly welcomed as a valuable and respected segment of the citizenry. That
goodwill wore thin as increasing numbers of Chinese arrived. In 1852 alone,
146
Chinese immigrants
Chinese immigrants eating a meal aboard the crowded ship carrying them to the western United
States. (Asian American Studies Library, University of California at Berkeley)
more than twenty thousand Chinese landed at San Francisco, bringing the to-
tal number of Chinese on the coast to approximately twenty-five thousand.
The flood of new arrivals severely taxed the city’s resources, particularly in
Chinatown, where most settled, at least temporarily. The white settlers’ atti-
tude toward the Chinese and Chinatown began to shift from curiosity to con-
tempt.
Under the slogan “California for Americans,” nativists began demanding
legislation to restrict Chinese laborers and miners. In 1852, the California
legislature responded by passing the state’s first discriminatory tax law, the
Foreign Miners’ Tax. This law required all miners who were not citizens of the
United States to pay a monthly license fee. Because the Chinese were the larg-
est recognizable group of foreign miners and already were concentrated in
easily accessible mining camps, they constituted the majority of those taxed.
California governor John Bigler also began a crusade against Chinese immi-
gration on the grounds that it constituted a danger to the welfare of the state.
The efforts of California nativists culminated in the Chinese Exclusion Act of
1882, one of the earliest federal laws restricting immigration to the United
States. Other legislation followed, including the alien land laws (1913-1923),
the Cable Act (1922), and the National Origins Act (1924).
As a result of the exclusion, and because men far outnumbered women,
the American Chinese population remained stable until the 1950’s.
147
Chinese immigrants
Chinese American Experiences The image of Chinese Americans im-

proved during this period, which ranges from 1942, the first full year of U.S.
war against Japan, to 1965, the year of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
This improvement was in part the result of China’s being an important ally of
the United States in World War II. A public awareness of the difference be-
tween Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans began to develop, at the
expense of the latter. The Chinese American literature of this period is domi-
nated by two sentiments, a diplomatic sentiment, which seeks to explain the
values and virtues of the Chinese heritage to the general reader, and a senti-
ment of belonging, of claiming America as home.
After 1965, the Chinese population of the United States rose from 250,000
in 1966 to 1.6 million in 1990. This gave rise to a debate over what, if any, dis-
tinctions should be drawn between the native-born and the foreign-born.
Frank Chin and the other editors of Aiiieeeee! An Anthology of Asian-American
Writers (1974) and The Big Aiiieeeee! An Anthology of Chinese American and Japa-
nese American Literature (1991) attempt to differentiate between the native-
born and the foreign-born, implying that Chinese American identity should
be determined on the basis of an American, rather than Chinese, mindset.
Chinese Immigration to the United States,

1851-2003
1979
50,000 U.S.-Chinese
relations are
45,000 normalized
40,000
Average immigrants per year
35,000 1882
Chinese
30,000 Exclusion Act
25,000
1850’s
20,000 California 1930’s
gold rush Japanese
15,000
invasion of
10,000 China
5,000
0
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. These figures do not include immigration from Hong Kong but do include
Taiwanese immigration from 1957-2003.
148
Chinese immigrants
Chinese fire-hose teams racing down the main thoroughfare of the notorious mining town Dead-
wood, Dakota, during a Fourth of July celebration around the end of the nineteenth century. (Li-
brary of Congress)
Newcomers (sometimes derided as “fresh off the boat,” source of the title of
David Henry Hwang’s FOB, 1979) and more recent arrivals have brought with
them significant resources and skills. These conditions render moot the
American-centered definition of Chinese American identity. The increased
diversity of the Chinese American community has made the issue of identity
complex.
A common theme in twentieth century Chinese American literature is the
critical representation of social issues. Cultural conflicts, generation gaps,
and gender troubles are common to the experiences of many Chinese Ameri-
cans from diverse backgrounds. This literature, including Maxine Hong
Kingston’s The Woman Warrior (1976) and Tripmaster Monkey: His Fake Book
(1989), is essential to Chinese American identity and tends to problematize
rather than resolve its dualities. This exploration of social issues has given rise
to critiques of the American Dream (for example, Gish Jen’s Typical American,
1991), of Western ideology regarding Asia (Hwang’s M. Butterfly, 1988), and
of the intricate complicities between American and Chinese ideologies.
These thoughtful works epitomize the complex maturity of the Chinese
American identity.
Compiled from essays by Balance Chow and Daniel J. Meissner
149
Chinese immigrants
Further Reading For comprehensive and up-to-date studies of Chinese

immigrants, see H. Mark Lai’s Becoming Chinese American: A History of Commu-
nities and Institutions (Walnut Creek, Calif.: AltaMira, 2004) and Birgit
Zinzius’s Chinese America: Stereotype and Reality—History, Present, and Future of
the Chinese Americans (New York: P. Lang, 2005). Victor R. Greene’s A Singing
Ambivalence: American Immigrants Between Old World and New, 1830-1930 (Kent,
Ohio: Kent State University Press, 2004) is a comparative study of the differ-
ent challenges faced by members of eight major immigrant groups, including
the Chinese. Gunther Barth’s Bitter Strength: A History of the Chinese in the
United States, 1850-1870 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964)
describes the early years of Chinese immigration, providing a good examina-
tion of the development of anti-Chinese sentiment in California. Stuart
Creighton Miller’s The Unwelcome Immigrant: The American Image of the Chinese,
1795-1882 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969) examines Chinese
immigration in terms of coolie labor and the fear that Chinese laborers
would undermine labor and revive slavery. Erika Lee’s At America’s Gates: Chi-
nese Immigration During the Exclusion Era, 1882-1943 (Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press, 2003) explores the period of limited Chinese immigra-
tion after the Chinese Exclusion Act and includes an afterward on U.S. immi-
gration policies after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Ellen Alex-
ander Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 2004) is a collection of firsthand accounts of modern immi-
grants from many nations, including China. Studies of the adaptation of Chi-
nese immigrants to life in the United States include Nazli Kibria’s Becoming
Asian American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean American Identities (Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002) and Lee-Beng Chua’s Psycho-
social Adaptation and the Meaning of Achievement for Chinese Immigrants (New
York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2002).
See also Asian American literature; Asian American stereotypes; Burlin-

game Treaty; Chinatowns; Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese de-
tentions in New York; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases; Chi-
nese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Chinese immigrants and family
customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; Generational acculturation; Immi-
gration Act of 1943; Lau v. Nichols; Page law; Tibetan immigrants; Wong Kim
Ark case.
150
Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush
Chinese immigrants and

California’s gold rush
The Event: Participation of Chinese immigrants in California’s gold rush
Date: 1849-1852
Place: San Francisco
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Economics; La-

bor; Nativism and racism
Significance: A major impetus to immigration from East Asia, the California

gold rush drew thousands of Chinese immigrants, who furnished hard la-
bor and suffered nativist antipathy.
In 1848, the electrifying news that gold had been discovered in California was
carried by every ship sailing from U.S. ports. Spread to every corner of the
world, the word soon began to draw adventurers away from family and liveli-
hoods to seek their fortunes in this distant land. In 1849, a tremendous num-
ber of pioneers—German, Irish, Scandinavian, Russian, Mexican, and oth-
ers—streamed into San Francisco, doubling the population of the state
within two years. Among these “forty-niners” was one group set apart by race,
dress, and language—the Chinese. Drawn to the United States by the promise
of golden wealth, the Chinese arrived in ever-increasing numbers, to the
growing alarm of California residents.
Almost all the Chinese entering the United States at this time came from
the area around Canton, in the southeastern province of Kwangtung. For
centuries, Cantonese peasants had made their living as laborers, farmers, and
fishermen. During the late 1840’s, floods, famines, peasant revolts, and over-
population forced many to leave their villages and seek work in nearby coun-
tries in the South China Sea. When word reached the province of gold mines
opening in California, Cantonese were eager to leave their impoverished
homeland for the chance of riches just across the Pacific. They were cautious,
however—the journey was long, expensive, and uncertain. Only three Chi-
nese made the trip in 1848.
Gold Strikes in California In 1849, the news of larger and richer gold
claims in California enticed 325 Cantonese to set sail for San Francisco. Most
of these young, unskilled men were sojourners, hoping to prospect for a few
years, acquire wealth, and return home. Like other new arrivals in the city,
they outfitted themselves with supplies, including sturdy boots in place of
their cotton shoes, and set out for the gold-bearing mountains around Sacra-
mento. They often traveled and worked in groups for companionship and
protection, taking over low-yielding claims that had been abandoned for
151
more prosperous sites. Through diligence and frugality, honed by genera-

tions of marginal existence in China, they frequently turned abandoned
claims into profitable ventures.
Not all Chinese immigrants, however, sought wealth in the gold mines.
Some found work in the cities, particularly San Francisco, which offered
abundant opportunity for unskilled laborers. Shops, restaurants, liveries, ho-
tels, and other businesses grew desperately short of workers as able-bodied
men abandoned their jobs to pan for gold. Chinese—newly arrived immi-
grants or disheartened miners—began filling these positions as general la-
borers, carpenters, and cooks. They also assumed jobs normally reserved for
women—who were in short supply in this rugged frontier boomtown—such
as seamstresses, launderers, and domestics. Their conscientious work style,
quiet demeanor, and dependable service made them ideal employees. Cali-
fornia businessmen soon began sending advertising notices to Canton, re-
cruiting Chinese workers for their various enterprises.
Chinese immigrant panning for gold in a California stream. (Asian American Studies Library, Univer-
sity of California at Berkeley)
152
Successful Chinese miners and workers also began opening their own busi-
nesses in the cities. In addition to equipping miners and supplying mining
camps, they established restaurants, hotels, and various small businesses ca-
tering to both Chinese and Westerners. Norman As-sing, an English-speaking
Chinese man who settled in San Francisco, managed his own candy store, bak-
ery, and a popular restaurant in which he often entertained local politicians
and policemen with lavish banquets. In December, 1849, his fellow country-
men elected him as the leader of the first Chinese mutual-aid society in the
United States, an organization assisting newly arrived Chinese immigrants.
This association filled an important role for the Chinese, who relied greatly
on family and village relations for social and economic sufficiency.
Through letters and returning sojourners, news of profitable work in the
cities and mines reached relatives and friends in Kwangtung. In 1850, approx-
imately 450 more Chinese emigrated to California; the following year, the
number jumped to more than 2,700. These new arrivals found assistance and
familiar food and lodging in San Francisco’s new Chinatown, a district in
which Chinese had begun to settle for convenience and safety. After a short
period of adjustment, most Chinese immigrants followed their predecessors
into the mountains, joining one of the many Chinese mining camps operat-
ing around Sacramento. Others remained in the city to work as manual labor-
ers. In general, these early Chinese immigrants worked with exceptional dili-
gence, industry, and enterprise and led a reticent existence in the mining
camps and cities.
Acceptance by the Business Community These positive qualities

earned the early Chinese immigrants acceptance among the California busi-
ness community. Although their waist-length braided hair, blue cotton pants
and jackets, and broad-brimmed straw hats set them apart from the rest of the
townspeople and “forty-niners,” they were warmly welcomed as a valuable and
respected segment of the citizenry. A San Francisco judge summed up the
early goodwill of Americans toward the Chinese:
Born and reared under different Governments and speaking different tongues,
we nevertheless meet here today as brothers. . . . You stand among us in all re-
spects as equals.
That goodwill wore thin as increasing numbers of Chinese arrived in the

city. In 1852 alone, more than twenty thousand Chinese landed at San Fran-
cisco, bringing the total number of Chinese on the coast to approximately
twenty-five thousand. The flood of new arrivals severely taxed the city’s re-
sources, particularly in Chinatown, where most settled, at least temporarily.
In packed Chinese boardinghouses, one cot was often rented to a number of
workers who slept on it on a rotating basis. Overcrowding created sanitation
problems, increased crime, and caused higher prices. Abundant cheap labor
stimulated competition for unskilled work that, over time, drove down wages.
153
The white settlers’ attitude toward the Chinese and Chinatown began to shift
from curiosity to contempt.
The attitude of white miners in the goldfields also changed. Prior to 1852,
bandits and claim-jumpers had occasionally driven Chinese off successful ex-
cavations, but these attacks were generally motivated by greed, not racism. Af-
ter 1852, antagonism and violence against Chinese miners increased. In Jack-
sonville, white miners drove Chinese miners off their claims and out of town.
In Chili Gulch, a mob beat a Chinese miner to death. For protection, Chinese
banded together in large mining camps, easily recognized by names such as
China City, China Creek, China Flat, China Gulch, and China Town.
Nativist Backlash Under the slogan “California for Americans,” nativists

began demanding legislation to restrict Chinese laborers and miners. In
1852, the California legislature responded by passing the state’s first discrimi-
natory tax law, the Foreign Miners’ Tax. This law required all miners who
were not citizens of the United States to pay a monthly license fee. Since the
Chinese were the largest recognizable group of foreign miners and already
were concentrated in easily accessible mining camps, they constituted the ma-
jority of those taxed. The same year, California state senator George B. Ting-
ley introduced a bill to eliminate “coolie labor”—contracts made with Chi-
nese laborers for work in California—for a set number of years.
California governor John Bigler also began a crusade against Chinese im-
migration on the grounds that it constituted a danger to the welfare of the
state. Tong K. Achick, a missionary-schooled, English-speaking Cantonese
who emigrated to San Francisco, represented the Chinese position before the
California legislature. As leader of the Four Great Houses in San Francisco—
forerunner of the famous Six Companies—he argued that these laws unfairly
targeted law-abiding Chinese, who were an asset, not a liability, to the state.
The mood in California, however, had changed, and Tong and other Chi-
nese advocates were unable to stop the growing anti-Chinese sentiment. Cali-
fornia nativists continued to push for state and national legislation limiting
Chinese immigration. Their efforts culminated in the Chinese Exclusion Act
of 1882, the first federal legislation restricting immigration to the United
States.
Daniel J. Meissner
Further Reading
nineteenth century.
1870. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964. Describes the
154
Chinese immigrants and family customs
early years of Chinese immigration, providing a good examination of the

development of anti-Chinese sentiment in California.
Chinese, 1795-1882. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Exam-
ines Chinese immigration in terms of coolie labor and the fear that Chi-
nese laborers would undermine labor and revive slavery.
Peffer, George Anthony. If They Don’t Bring Women Here: Chinese Female Im-
migration Before Exclusion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999. Study
of the special problems confronting female Chinese immigration to the
United States during a period when the overwhelming bulk of Chinese im-
migrants were men.
New York: Penguin Books, 1989. Chapter 3 succinctly examines the early
years of Chinese immigration. Other chapters explore the Asian immi-
grant experience in detail.
See also Burlingame Treaty; California gold rush; Chinatowns; Chinese

Exclusion Act; Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and family customs;
Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Chinese immigrants and

family customs
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Families and
marriage
Significance: Chinese Americans have drawn on a tradition of strong family

relationships to help overcome discrimination and become one of the
most successful immigrant groups in the United States.
Chinese Americans constitute the oldest and largest Asian American group in
the United States. North Americans who identify themselves as Chinese are
scattered throughout the fifty states and Canada with their largest concentra-
tions in California, New York, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Illinois, British Colum-
bia, and Ontario.
More than many other ethnic groups, Chinese Americans have labored to
maintain the tradition of strong families and obedience to cultural traditions.
While the roles of Chinese Americans underwent great changes after World
War II, most of them strongly desire to maintain traditions fostered by obedi-
ence to Confucian values.
155
Immigration and Discrimination Significant Chinese immigration to

North America began in response to the California gold rush of 1848-1849.
Seven thousand miles across the Pacific Ocean, China was a rapidly growing
country plagued by foreign domination, political instability, and a weakened
dynastic government. Before 1848, political and social stability in China had
discouraged emigration to North America.
After news of American “mountains of gold” reached southern China,
thousands of Chinese men joined Germans, Irish, Spanish, English, and
other immigrants in the hunt for gold in Northern California. San Francisco
was soon dubbed Jinshan, or “golden mountain,” by newly arrived Chinese
settlers. Mainly from southern China, Chinese immigrants were predomi-
nantly male. Most hoped to make money and return to their families in
China. Like most gold seekers, these settlers became more frustrated than
rich.
Reluctant to return home without money, most Chinese accepted posi-
tions in various trades that sought workers to offset severe labor shortages in
the West. While typically paid less than non-Asian workers, Chinese immi-
grants were reluctant to return to the political instability and lower wages that
awaited them in China. Chinese workers played an important part in the con-
struction of the western section of the transcontinental railroad. Chinese im-
Family-run Chinese laundry operation around 1910. During the nineteenth and early twentieth cen-
turies, Chinese immigrants became so closely associated with laundries that Chinese laundry work-
ers became a popular stereotype. (California State Library)
156
Chinese woman with her five children in Hawaii in 1913. (NARA)
migrants working on the railroad were so valued for their dedication to hard
work that the Central Pacific Railroad began to recruit workers in China.
Even after the railroad was completed, immigration from China continued,
and newly arrived Chinese immigrants were able to find jobs in factories and
farms. Between 1860 and 1880 immigrants from China constituted more than
8 percent of California’s population.
Scapegoating Chinese Immigrants As the North American economy

entered a depression during the early 1880’s, Chinese immigrants became
convenient scapegoats for populist politicians, labor unions, and unem-
ployed non-Asians. Even in Canadian British Columbia, the small Chinese
population was blamed by many for the overall economic downturn. In re-
sponse to growing anti-Chinese sentiments in the West, the United States
moved to ban Chinese immigration with the passage of the Chinese Exclu-
sion Act of 1882. The law suspended Chinese immigration and declared Chi-
nese immigrants already in the United States ineligible for citizenship. While
Chinese immigrants made up only an estimated 0.002 percent of the Ameri-
can population at the time, the act received wide support and severely limited
Chinese immigration into the next century. In 1888 the Scott Act stiffened
the 1882 law by prohibiting the entry of Chinese nationals into the United
States. The Geary Act of 1892 extended the exclusion of Chinese immigrants
by denying habeas corpus rights to persons of Chinese ancestry and requiring
all persons of Chinese ancestry to register with local authorities. Immediate
deportation threatened those Chinese immigrants who failed to comply with
the requirement that they carry official permits. Despite a court challenge by
157
American citizens of Chinese ancestry, the act was upheld by the U.S. Su-
preme Court. On the West Coast, numerous local laws were passed to limit
the growth of Chinese businesses and settlements.
Severely hindered by discriminatory legal codes and racism, Chinese im-
migrants responded by constructing social structures to serve the needs of
their existing population. So-called “Chinatowns” established schools, news-
papers, businesses, and cultural institutions. For the most part, Chinese im-
migrants maintained a willingness to preserve family and cultural tradi-
tions despite the racism they experienced in North America. The 1906 San
Francisco earthquake marked an important milestone in the growth of the
Chinese American family. At that time, only 5 percent of the city’s Chinese
population were female. After the city’s birth records were destroyed in the
earthquake, thousands of Chinese claimed they had been born in the United
States. Unable to refute their applications for naturalization, the U.S. govern-
ment was forced to grant them citizenship and allow Chinese spouses to im-
migrate to the United States. After Chinese families were reunited, the tradi-
tional Confucian values of obedience and dedication to family remained an
important element in Chinese American culture.
The Making of a “Model Minority” As discriminatory practices and

laws were overturned in the twentieth century, Chinese Americans moved to
integrate themselves into the mainstream of American culture. The U.S. alli-
ance with China in its fight against Japan during World War II served as a ma-
jor impetus to repeal barriers to immigration. As restrictions on immigration
eased, families grew and typically worked hard to obtain educational oppor-
tunities for their children. The emphasis on education was so successful that
by 1970, 56 percent of working Chinese held white-collar jobs, a figure above
the national average.
Chinese Americans have generally attempted to maintain ties to their
homeland and adhere to cultural traditions. Central to this effort is their use
of the Chinese language as part of primary and secondary education. Knowl-
edge of the Chinese language is a valued cultural tradition and a marketable
job skill, particularly as North American trade with Asia has grown. In addi-
tion to preserving their language, most Chinese Americans observe tradi-
tional Chinese festivals. The most significant, the so-called Spring Festival, or
Chinese New Year, is widely observed by Chinese Americans. This celebration
is based upon the Chinese lunar calendar and is marked by a large family
meal on New Year’s eve. Children are presented with hong bao, red envelopes
containing money, and fireworks are often used to scare off evil spirits. In
1993 the U.S. Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp in honor of the
Chinese New Year.
Other major festivals include the mid-autumn Moon Festival to celebrate
the annual harvest. Similar to the North American tradition of Thanksgiving
Day, this festival celebrates the harvest and the good fortunes of the previous
year. This holiday also centers on a large family dinner and is marked by the
158
consumption of moon cakes stuffed with candied fruits. Other major festivals
include the Dragon Boat Festival on the fifth day of the fifth moon according
to the Chinese calendar. This festival is celebrated with sticky rice cakes and
boat races.
As Chinese immigration swelled during the 1980’s and 1990’s, the role of
the family in Chinese culture continued to change. As Chinese Americans be-
came socially and economically diverse and obtained higher-paying jobs, the
traditional commitment to the wishes of the family weakened. Because of
the economic successes of some Chinese Americans, current stereotypes
have also undergone radical change. Once denounced as “coolies” for their
willingness to work hard for lower wages, many Chinese have been labeled
a “model minority” for their perceived overcommitment to financial re-
sponsibility, education, and work. While it is significant that many Chinese
Americans have college degrees, many of them resent the model-minority
stereotype, because it tends to overlook the discrimination toward Chinese
Americans that has persisted in American culture.
Lawrence I. Clark
Further Reading
Brownstone, David M. The Chinese-American Heritage. New York: Facts On File,
1988. General survey of the Chinese immigrant experience in the United
States.
Chen, Shehong. Being Chinese, Becoming Chinese American. Urbana: University
of Illinois Press, 2002. Scholarly study of the sociological evolution of Chi-
nese American communities since the early twentieth century.
Chua, Lee-Beng. Psycho-social Adaptation and the Meaning of Achievement for Chi-
nese Immigrants. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2002. Sociological
analysis of the adaptative processes through which Chinese immigrants to
the United States go, with a close examination of traditional Chinese belief
systems.
Hoobler, Dorothy, and Thomas Hoobler. The Chinese American Family Album.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Exploration of the experiences
of Chinese Americans that contains a broad range of first-person ac-
counts—including personal recollections, diary entries, and letters—to
accompany many photographs.
Kibria, Nazli. Becoming Asian American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean
American Identities. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. Com-
parative study of second-generation Chinese and Korean Americans.
Louie, Vivian S. Compelled to Excel: Immigration, Education, and Opportunity
Among Chinese Americans. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2004.
159
Chinese Six Companies
Sociological study of the largely family-driven Chinese drive to achieve suc-

cess in education and business.
gration Before Exclusion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999. Study of
female immigration during a period when the bulk of Chinese immigrants
to the United States were young men.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Chinatowns; Chinese immigrants;

Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Filipino immigrants and fam-
ily customs; Korean immigrants and family customs; Southeast Asian immi-
grants; Vietnamese immigrants.

Identification: Chinese immigrant protective association that merged sev-
eral older organizations
Date: Begun in 1854

liberties
Significance: Rising anti-Asian nativism prompted Chinese immigrants liv-

ing on the West Coast to organize for political representation, social ser-
vices, and physical protection.
News of the California gold rush of 1848-1849 was the first catalyst for large
Chinese emigration across the Pacific to the United States. Most of the immi-
grants were young men who worked as laborers, often on the transcontinen-
tal railroads. The completion of the railroads and the Panic of 1873, which
was brought on by an international financial crisis, had caused great eco-
nomic difficulties in the West, and many white Americans and elements of or-
ganized labor began to blame the Chinese for the lack of jobs and the eco-
nomic recession. Violence against Chinese became widespread. In October,
1871, crowds of whites burned and looted the Los Angeles Chinatown after
two white policemen were killed by Chinese assailants. Nineteen men, women,
and children were killed and hundreds injured as angry whites randomly at-
tacked crowds of Chinese.
Anti-Chinese Laws Under intense political pressure from white voters in

the West, Congress moved to exclude Chinese and other foreign-born Asians
from obtaining citizenship. The 1870 Nationality Act denied the Chinese the
160
possibility of becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. In 1878, California con-

vened a constitutional convention that prohibited further Chinese immigra-
tion and granted local municipalities the right to exclude Chinese immi-
grants or confine them to specified areas.
Chinese immigrants were prohibited from owning property, obtaining
business licenses, procuring government jobs, and testifying in any legal pro-
ceedings. At the urging of white voters in California, the U.S. Congress in
1882 passed the first of a number of Chinese exclusion acts that prohibited
the entrance of Chinese into the United States. The Supreme Court upheld
the exclusion acts, ruling in 1889 that the Chinese were “a race that will not
assimilate with us[and] could be excluded when deemed dangerous to peace
and security.”
In San Francisco, anti-Chinese laws were supplemented to isolate its large
Chinese community. Local laws and hostility from whites forced newly arrived
Chinese to settle in Chinatown. Segregated by these discriminatory laws, Chi-
natown began to establish structures to govern and protect its residents. San
Francisco’s Chinatown, made up primarily of men as a result of the immigra-
tion control acts, had developed a reputation as a center of vice. Chinatown
leaders moved to control the small criminal element that had begun to define
Chinese society to the non-Chinese residents of San Francisco.
Unemployed men loitering on the “Street of the Gamblers” in San Francisco’s Chinatown around
the turn of the twentieth century, when San Francisco had the largest concentration of Chinese im-
migrants in North America. (Library of Congress)
161
The Six Companies Form Most of the early Chinese immigrants to San
Francisco’s Chinatown came from the southern provinces of Guangdong and
Fujian. Early on, wealthy merchants in Chinatown had organized around clan
groups and district associations in their hometowns in China. By 1854, there
were six main associations in Chinatown. The first, formed in 1849, was the
Gangzhou Gongsi, named after the district in Guangdong province that
was the source of most of its members. The second, the San Y i Gongsi, con-
sisted of immigrants from the administrative districts of Nanhai, Panyu, and
Shunde. Immigrants from the districts of Yanging, Xinning, Xinhui, and
Kaiping made up the third association, the Si Y i Gongsi. Immigrants from
the Xiangshan area formed the fourth association, the Yang He Gongsi. The
fifth, the Ren He Gongsi, was made up of the so-called Hakka peoples from
Guanxi province.
The formation in 1854 of the sixth association, the Ning Yang Gongsi,
marked the informal beginnings of the Chinese Six Companies Association.
The Six Companies served as a public association for leaders of the major as-
sociations in Chinatown to mediate disputes between its members and serve
as a representative of the Chinese community as a whole. Newly arrived immi-
grants from China who were in need of assistance sought out these family or
district associations. When business or personal disputes developed between
members of different associations, the Six Companies would provide a forum
for peaceful mediation of disputes.
The Role of the Companies The anti-Chinese legislation of the 1880’s

forced the Six Companies to move toward a more overt role as representatives
of Chinese interests in San Francisco. On November 19, 1882, the group for-
malized its existence by establishing an executive body drawn from members
of the existing associations. The Six Companies, formally known as the Chi-
nese Consolidated Benevolent Association (CCBA), adapted some of the rep-
resentative principles of U.S. political culture. The CCBA was recognized by
the state of California in 1901. At the time, the Six Companies sought to cre-
ate a body above family clans or associations that would resist the growing
anti-Chinese movements in California and the western United States and
would assume a more public role in its resistance to anti-Chinese legislation.
The Six Companies in San Francisco had limited success in challenging
anti-Chinese legislation as violations of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution. The Six Companies supported the 1886 case of Yick Wo v.
Hopkins, which forced the Supreme Court to overturn San Francisco safety or-
dinances designed to harass Chinese laundrymen. Anti-Chinese attitudes in
San Francisco and across the United States did not diminish after 1900. In
1902, an amendment to extend the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 indefi-
nitely was passed by Congress without debate.
In the first half of the twentieth century, the Six Companies in San Fran-
cisco supported measures to improve the quality of life in Chinatown. In
1905, the Six Companies established a school in Chinatown to teach children
162
Chinese culture and language. During the 1920’s, it helped raise funds to
construct the Chinese Hospital to serve the Chinatown community. The Six
Companies also established block watch programs and night patrols to pre-
vent crime in the Chinatown area. The group still worked to overturn anti-
Chinese sentiment and was an increasingly powerful political force, able to
deliver votes to local politicians sympathetic to the views of Chinatown citi-
zens.
In 1943, Congress passed an Immigration Act that repealed the exclusion
laws, and barriers to Chinese Americans in the United States began to fall. In
California, many Americans of Chinese ancestry moved to white neighbor-
hoods after anti-Chinese laws were overturned. In this period, one of the
major activities of the Six Companies was the promotion of the Nationalist
government in Taiwan. Because most of the residents of San Francisco’s Chi-
natown had immigrated from mainland China, significant opposition to the
historical leadership of the group appeared.
The Six Companies’ promotion of social isolation from white society was
very divisive during the 1960’s. A longtime opponent of federal social pro-
grams to aid the poor, the Six Companies eventually embraced government
assistance and even administered federal job training programs during the
1970’s. As Chinese Americans became more involved in Chinese politics and
gained access to higher-paying jobs, participation in Chinatown affairs de-
creased significantly. The Six Companies became less of a force in Chinese
American politics on a national scale, but it continued to work from its base in
San Francisco.
Lawrence I. Clark
Further Reading Victor Nee and Brett de Barry Nee’s “The Establish-
ment,” in Longtime Californ’: A Documentary Study of an American Chinatown
(New York: Pantheon Books, 1973), examines the founding of the Six Com-
panies and its role in Chinatown in the twentieth century. Thomas W. Chinn’s
Bridging the Pacific: San Francisco Chinatown and Its People (San Francisco: Chi-
nese Historical Society of America, 1989) provides a detailed look at San
Francisco from its founding to the late 1980’s, by the cofounder of the Chi-
nese Historical Association of America.
See also Burlingame Treaty; California gold rush; Chinatowns; Chinese

American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese immigrants;
Chinese immigrants and family customs; Coolies; “Yellow peril” campaign.
163
Citizenship
Citizenship
Definition: Status of being a citizen—an inhabitant of a country who enjoys
its full privileges and rights, such as the right to vote, to hold elective office,
and to enjoy the full protections of government
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Civil rights and liberties
Significance: Citizenship is a legal term recognizing certain rights and pro-

tections; it implies responsibilities as well as privileges. A large portion of
immigrants to the United States seek citizenship, but not all qualify for it.
Residence in a particular place does not automatically give a person citizen-

ship. Citizenship must be conferred by law or by constitution. The definition
of a citizen was not spelled out in the U.S. Constitution until the Fourteenth
Amendment was passed in 1868. That amendment states,
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdic-
tion thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they re-
side.
Birthright Citizenship and the English Heritage Americans are ac-

customed to the concept of automatic citizenship granted to persons born in
the United States, who are called “natural-born citizens.” Historically, this was
not a common concept. Most nations were more like ancient Rome, which
had different degrees of citizenship while the majority of people in the Ro-
man Empire were merely “subjects” of Rome and did not have the rights of
citizenship. Many were slaves of Rome. Rome had two classes of citizens: full
citizens and those who could own property and engage in business but could
not hold public office. The children of these “half citizens” received the same
political status as their parents.
The concept of American citizenship grew from English roots. During the
Middle Ages, political loyalties and protections came from the feudal system
that operated in Europe for a thousand years. A characteristic of modern
times was the development of the idea of nation-states and with that the con-
cept of nationality. Both obligations and rights were intrinsic to the status of
having a nationality.
The English common law held that people born within the royal domin-
ions were automatically the “king’s subjects.” If one’s parents were “natural-
born subjects,” then one had an inherent claim to the “rights of Englishmen.”
As early as 1350 it was clear that in English law the place of birth was not so im-
portant as the citizenship of a child’s parents. In legal terms, citizenship was
affected by jus soli (birthplace) and jus sanguinis (descent).
164
Citizenship
Colonial Background The American colonists were merely English peo-

ple residing in America, and they claimed all their rights as Englishmen. The
Virginia Charter of 1606 recognized that situation, and in it the king granted
to all his subjects living in the “Colonies and Plantations,” as well as to any
children born there, “all Liberties, Franchises, and Immunities, within any of
our other Dominions, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been abiding
and born, within this our Realm of England.”
In fact it was this very concept of equality of Englishmen, regardless of
where in the realm they lived, that provided a philosophical basis for the
American war for independence. The Americans demanded equal treatment
and claimed that their own “American parliaments” (assemblies) should rule
over them rather than the British Parliament in London. Not all American
colonists were English, however, and that fact raised questions of citizenship.
It was much easier to become naturalized citizens in America than in En-
gland. English Americans from the earliest days of settlement had accepted
“foreigners” as equal subjects of the king.
Citizenship: Limited or Absolute? Are the obligations of citizenship

and allegiance limited or absolute? This was a key question in the disputes be-
tween England and the American colonies before the American Revolution.
In the Declaratory Act of 1766 the British Parliament claimed to have full au-
thority “to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the
colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain.”
The Americans categorically rejected that idea of unlimited political au-
thority over them. They claimed their rights as Englishmen to make their own
laws within their colonial assemblies. They rejected the idea that the British
Parliament could dictate to them and accepted the authority of the English
king only in a limited constitutional sense. Citizenship required allegiance,
but as freemen, not as slaves. Patrick Henry eloquently expressed the attitude
of his countrymen:
Is life so sweet and peace so dear as to be purchased at the price of chains and
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but,
as for me, give me Liberty or give me Death!
Contractual American Citizenship The result was an independent

United States and a constitution that spelled out the limits of governmen-
tal authority. The government was to be strong enough to provide for the
common defense and a stable society, but it was to be limited in its inter-
ference in the lives of the free citizens of the United States. Citizens owed obe-
dience to governments only in exchange for the protection of their funda-
mental rights. It was essentially a contract with mutual obligations on both
sides.
The new state governments had the authority to grant citizenship within
their borders. They did so and welcomed many new immigrants. Typically the
165
Citizenship
A newly naturalized American citizen from Japan. (NARA)
states required a year or two of residence within the state and an oath of alle-
giance and good moral character for a person to become a citizen.
After the U.S. Constitution went into effect, the Naturalization Act of 1802
required five years of residence, a loyalty oath accepting the principles of the
Constitution, and proof of good character and behavior for a person to be-
come a United States citizen. The law also required all immigrants to register
with the government.
Citizenship Denied During the nineteenth century there were two classes
of people born in the United States who were denied citizenship in that coun-
try: slaves and American Indians. Even the 250,000 free blacks in the United
States did not have equal protection of the law and political opportunities as-
sociated with citizenship during the first half of the nineteenth century.
The conscience of many Americans was stirred, but it took a civil war and
further political upheaval before these matters were addressed. Former slaves
were—at least on paper—granted citizenship and guaranteed civil rights with
the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution
(1865-1870). Some American Indians were granted citizenship with the
Dawes Act of 1887; others had to wait until the Citizenship Act of 1924.
“Natural-born citizens” are either born in the United States or born in a
foreign country of one or two parents who are United States citizens. A “cer-
tificate of citizenship” is issued to confirm that fact, but normally a five-year
166
Citizenship
period of continuous residency in the United States is required between the

ages of fourteen and twenty-eight years.
Naturalization A “naturalization paper” is issued for naturalized citizens

when they acquire citizenship. They must have been lawful residents of the
United States for five years and must demonstrate a knowledge of the funda-
mentals of American government and history, and they must be of good
moral character. They must also promise to obey the laws of the United States
and defend its Constitution and laws and agree to serve in the United States
military if required to do so. The process includes a hearing before a United
States district court or certain state courts of record. That hearing is followed,
at least thirty days later, by the administering of the oath of allegiance.
Foreign Visitors Aliens visiting the United States have certain rights and
protections, but remaining in the United States is not one of them. Aliens are
sometimes expelled from the United States for subversion, criminal or im-
moral behavior, violation of narcotics laws, or mental or physical defects.
More often, however, expulsion is for failure to comply with conditions of
nonimmigrant status or for entering the United States without legal docu-
ments or by false statements. Approximately ten thousand aliens a year are
thus deported from the United States. Deportation of aliens is an administra-
tive enforcement of the laws and not a judicial procedure, so court trials are
not involved.
Expatriation American citizens have the right, if they choose, to relin-

quish their citizenship. This process is called “expatriation.” They cannot,
however, lose their citizenship simply by fleeing the country to avoid serving
in the military or by serving in a foreign military without United States con-
sent. A request to renounce citizenship can be accomplished in the United
States only in time of war. In a foreign country a person can make the renun-
ciation before a diplomatic officer or can take an oath of allegiance to an-
other government.
Expatriation is a very rare occurrence among American citizens because
citizenship is so highly prized. There are many millions of people in other
parts of the world who would quickly take American citizenship if they had
the opportunity. Many do immigrate to the United States, but American im-
migration laws slow the flow of naturalization, and many people must wait
many years before becoming American citizens.
William H. Burnside
Further Reading
Becker, Aliza. Citizenship for Us: A Handbook on Naturalization and Citizenship.
Washington, D.C.: Catholic Legal Immigration Network, 2002. Practical
guide to U.S. citizenship laws for lay readers.
167
CLOTILDE slave ship
Hing, Bill Ong. Immigration and the Law: A Dictionary. Santa Barbara, Calif.:
ABC-Clio, 1999. Detailed reference work on immigration law that ad-
dresses citizenship issues.
Kettner, James H. The Development of American Citizenship, 1608-1870. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1978. Offers a historical perspec-
tive on changing views and laws relating to citizenship in U.S. history.
Kondo, Atsushi, ed. Citizenship in a Global World: Comparing Citizenship Rights
for Aliens. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Collection of essays on citizenship
and immigrants in ten different nations, including the United States and
Canada.
wood Press, 1999. Broad survey of the history of changing federal legisla-
tion relating to immigration and naturalization.
Rubio-Marn, Ruth. Immigration as a Democratic Challenge: Citizenship and Inclu-
sion in Germany and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press,
2000. Comparative study of American and German laws concerning the
naturalization of immigrants.
See also Alien land laws; Cable Act; Immigration and Naturalization Ser-
vice; Naturalization; Naturalization Act of 1790; Nguyen v. Immigration and
Naturalization Service; Ozawa v. United States; Wong Kim Ark case.
CLOTILDE slave ship

The Event: Last American ship to carry African slaves to the United States
Date: July, 1859
Place: Mobile Bay, Alabama
Immigration issues: African Americans; Slavery
Significance: Seizure of the Clotilde finally ended the importation of Afri-

can slaves to the United States that had been illegal since 1808.
There are contradictory reports about slavers—ships especially built to trans-

port slaves—during the period from 1858 to 1861. Historians, however, have
managed to piece together an accurate account of the Clotilde, the last U.S.
slave ship, which smuggled more than a hundred Africans into Alabama.
The Slave Trade The slave trade was outlawed by Congress in 1808. This
brutal business continued without serious interference, however, until the
early 1820’s, when federal officials began capturing slavers and freeing their
prisoners. Public sentiment, even in the South, did not favor revival of the
168
CLOTILDE slave ship
trade. To annoy northern antislavery and abolitionist advocates, numerous

rumors were spread by slave traders and sympathizers about slavers landing
on the southeastern coast. For example, the New York Daily Tribune received
many letters reporting landings of slavers in Florida and the Carolinas. There
were even rumors during the 1860’s of a prosperous underground slave-
trading company operating in New Orleans. The Clotilde’s history, however,
has been confirmed by eyewitness accounts and careful reconstruction of
events by historians.
Congress had revived laws against slave trading and declared that anyone
convicted would be hanged. The United States had been later than almost ev-
ery other civilized nation in the world in abolishing slave trading. Even New
York City, bastion of abolitionists, became a refuge for eighty-five slave ships,
many of them built and sent to Africa from that city. Much profit could be
made in the $17,000,000-per-year business. According to one account, 15,000
Africans were smuggled to the United States in 1859 alone, the last 117 of
whom were brought by the Clotilde. In contrast, the British government, after
issuing its injunction against the slave trade in the eighteenth century, seized
and destroyed 625 slave ships and freed their forty thousand prisoners. In the
United States, only the abolitionists consistently confronted the government
for its apathy toward slave smuggling.
The CLOTILDE Project Timothy Meagher, with brothers Jim and Byrns,
masterminded the Clotilde project. Timothy, an imposing Irishman known for
his adventurous character, was a plantation owner and captain of the steam-
boat Roger B. Taney, which carried passengers, cargo, and mail to and from
Montgomery on the Alabama River. Apparently in a lighthearted argument
with some passengers on his steamboat, Meagher made a thousand-dollar bet
that within a year or two he would bring a ship full of slaves to Mobile Bay
without being apprehended by federal officials. Meagher had many years’ ex-
perience in cruising the Alabama River. He knew his way around every hid-
den bayou, swamp, canebrake, and sandbar better than anyone else in the
South. For his operation, he needed a slave ship. He purchased a lumber
schooner called the Clotilde for thirty-five thousand dollars in late 1858 and
rebuilt it as a 327-ton slaver. He hired his friend Bill Foster, who was experi-
enced in constructing and sailing the old slavers, as skipper.
Foster was to sail to the west coast of Africa and seek King Dahomey’s assis-
tance in procuring two hundred young slaves. The Clotilde was equipped with
a crew, guns, and cutlasses. To control the prisoners, Meagher supplied the
ship with iron manacles, rings, and chains. Foster hired his crew from all over
the South, enticing them with liquor, money, and promises of adventure. In
the dead of night, massive quantities of food, mainly yams and rice, and
drinking water were transported to the ship from Meagher’s plantation. To
give the ship the look of a lumber schooner, some piles of lumber were placed
on the deck. Captain Foster hired the infamous King Dahomey and his
drunken thugs to raid villages and capture two hundred young, healthy men
169
CLOTILDE slave ship
and women. The attacks must have taken place early one summer morning in
May or early June of 1859. King Dahomey’s band raided the two peaceful vil-
lages of Whinney and Ataka. They burned huts, injured women and children,
and tied up more than 170 young Africans by their necks. The captives were
forced into the hold of the Clotilde.
The return trip was an awful scene of helpless people, racked with convul-
sions, crammed into dark, damp quarters, lacking adequate food and water.
Foster had as many as thirty-nine bodies thrown overboard before arriving
back in the United States. The ship returned in July, 1859, and waited in front
of Biloxi in the Mississippi Sound. Foster hired a friend’s tugboat and in the
dead of night, pulled the Clotilde, undetected by government vessels present
in Mobile Bay, to a prearranged location in the swamps of the Tombigbee
River. Meagher was the best man to maneuver the craft in the treacherous
bayous. The sick, exhausted Africans were moved quietly to an out-of-the-way
plantation belonging to Meagher’s friend, John M. Dabney, who hid them in
the canebrakes. From there, Meagher took charge of his steamer, the Roger B.
Taney, and kept Foster and the Clotilde crew members hidden aboard her until
they reached Montgomery, where they were paid off and whisked to New York
City for dispersal.
Landing the Slave Cargo The slaver Clotilde was promptly burned at wa-
ter’s edge as soon as its African cargo had been removed. Meagher made elab-
orate preparations to throw townsfolk and government officials off the track.
The Department of Justice was informed, however, and Meagher was arrested
at his plantation and placed on trial in short order. Meagher’s trial was a
sham. He was released on bond for lack of evidence. His efforts to conceal all
signs of the ship and its cargo had paid off, but he had to spend close to
$100,000 in lawyers’ fees and bribes. The prosecution was delayed, and the se-
cessionists came to his rescue. News of the Clotilde’s landing and Meagher’s
trial was drowned by the presidential campaign and widespread talk of civil
war.
Government officials finally learned where the Africans were hidden.
They commissioned the steamer Eclipse for finding and transferring the Afri-
cans to Mobile. Meagher, learning of the government’s decision, got the
Eclipse crew and government passengers drunk, giving him and his men time
to move the prisoners to a friend’s plantation two hundred miles up the Ala-
bama River.
Meagher’s slave-smuggling venture was a financial disaster. He bought the
Africans from King Dahomey for $8,460 in gold plus ninety casks of rum and
some cases of yard goods. He was able to sell only twenty-five slaves; it is not
clear exactly what happened to the rest. There were reports that Meagher
later transferred the others to his plantation near Mobile. Some ended up
marrying and living with local African Americans in the vicinity. Some were
reported to have died of homesickness or other maladies. Many others settled
in cabins behind the Meagher plantation house, which was burned in 1905.
170
CLOTILDE slave ship
The CLOTILDE in History In 1906, a journalistic account of the Clotilde epi-

sode appeared in Harper’s Monthly Magazine. The author, H. M. Byers, had
found several soft-spoken Africans who told of having been smuggled aboard
the Clotilde. They still maintained some of their own culture and language,
along with their African gentleness of demeanor. Most of their children were
married to local black residents of Mobile and neighboring areas. Byers con-
ducted extensive interviews with two who had endured the journey from Af-
rica to Alabama: an old man named Gossalow, who had a tribal tattoo on his
breast, and an old woman named Abaky, who had intricate tribal tattoos on
both cheeks. Gossalow and his wife had been stolen from the village of Whin-
ney, and Abaky from the town of Ataka, near King Dahomey’s land. They had
kept many of their old traditions in their original form with little modifica-
tion. For example, they still buried their dead in graves filled with oak leaves.
They spoke nostalgically of their peaceful West African farms, planted with
abundant yams and rice.
The destruction of the Clotilde might be said to symbolize the end of one of
the most despicable enterprises in modern history and the beginning of the
infusion of the vibrant African culture into North American society.
Chogollah Maroufi
Further Reading
Byers, H. M. “The Last Slave Ship.” Harper’s Monthly Magazine 53 (1906): 742-
746. A sensationalized journalistic version of the episode, but filled with
valuable and accurate details. Especially valuable are the author’s inter-
views with two surviving Africans who were smuggled into the United
States aboard the Clotilde.
Howard, Warren S. “The Elusive Smuggled Slave.” In American Slavers and the
Federal Law, 1837-1862. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963. Pro-
vides various accounts of the Clotilde.
Sellers, James Benson. Slavery in Alabama. Birmingham: University of Ala-
bama Press, 1950. Conveys the historical and social mood of the slave era
and gives some details of the Clotilde’s smuggling operation.
Spear, John R. The American Slave Trade: An Account of Its Origins, Growth and
Suppression. Williamstown, Mass.: Corner House, 1978. A well-researched
and thoroughly documented book about the slave trade in general. Chap-
ter 19 provides an account of the Clotilde voyage and its aftermath.
Wish, Harvey. “The Revival of the African Slave Trade in the United States,
1859-1860.” Mississippi Valley Historical Review 27 (1940-1941): 569-588. A
comprehensive account of various smuggling operations just before the
Civil War.
See also African immigrants; Afro-Caribbean immigrants.
171
Coast Guard, U.S.
Coast Guard, U.S.

Identification: Federal military service and law-enforcement agency that
provides maritime support for the war on terror as part of the Department
of Homeland Security
Date: Established in 1790 as the Revenue Marine
Immigration issues: Border control; Illegal immigration; Law enforcement
Significance: The nation’s oldest maritime military service, the U.S. Coast
Guard is responsible for protecting coastal boundaries and infrastructure
and intercepting illegal drugs, goods, and aliens that are attempting to en-
ter the United States.
The modern-day U.S. Coast Guard is the largest and most advanced maritime
law-enforcement agency in the world and has a long and distinguished his-
tory as an autonomous military branch. In contrast to other branches of the
U.S. military, the Coast Guard has never been part of the Department of De-
fense. The forerunner of the Coast Guard was established in 1790 as the Reve-
nue Marine. Since then, the service has undergone major changes and re-
structuring.
In 2003, the Coast Guard became part of the Department of Homeland Se-
curity, and since then its primary mission has been to defend more than
95,000 miles of U.S. coastlines, 360 ports, 10,000 miles of interstate river-
fronts, and 3.4 million square miles of ocean. This monumental responsibil-
ity requires the joint cooperation of local, state, and other federal agencies, as
well as the private maritime industry and international entities.
The Coast Guard receives its law-enforcement statutory authority under
Title 14 of the United States Code. Historically, the service has had three pri-
mary law-enforcement charges. These have included collection of tariffs for
imported goods, protection of shipping from piracy on the high seas, and the
interception of illegal goods and persons. Of these tasks, the primary goal of
the Coast Guard prior to World War II involved the confiscation of material
contraband. During the 1960’s, however, the service began increasingly to
limit the flow of illegal immigration coming from Cuba. After large numbers
of Cuban refugees were intercepted during the early and mid-1960’s, the
numbers decreased until the landmark Mariel boatlift of 1980. That massive
exodus of 125,000 Cuban refugees to the United States marked the largest
Coast Guard peacetime operation to that date.
The 1970’s saw a noticeable increase in the role of the Coast Guard in stem-
ming the flow of illicit drugs into the United States. The service’s drug-
enforcement duties continued to increase throughout the first years of the
twenty-first century, as the service seized large quantities of marijuana, co-
caine, and other illicit drugs. Particularly notable were seizures of 13 tons of
172
Coast Guard, U.S.
marijuana in San Diego in 1984, 20 tons of marijuana in Jamaica in 1987, and

13.5 tons of cocaine from a vessel 1,500 miles south of California in 2001.
The Coast Guard has also served in virtually every major military engage-
ment since the founding of the United States. It has assisted U.S. Navy opera-
tions with personnel and equipment and has also been assigned special mis-
sions. It has a rich and well-documented history of recognized service during
the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the
Vietnam War, and the Persian Gulf War of 1991. As part of Operation Iraqi
Freedom in early 2003, the Coast Guard continued to support other branches
of America’s armed services.
Current Day and Beyond On February 25, 2003, supervision of the

Coast Guard was passed from the Department of Transportation to the newly
founded Department of Homeland Security. The Homeland Security Act of
2002 lists five specific law-enforcement directives for the Coast Guard. These
directives focus on securing ports, waterways, and coastal security; defense
readiness and response; drug interdiction; illegal immigrant interdiction;
other law-enforcement duties as needed.
In 2004, the Coast Guard employed approximately 39,000 active duty per-
sonnel, 8,100 reservists, and some 37,000 civilian auxiliary personnel. On a
typical day the Coast Guard boards 138 vessels for law-enforcement checks,
performs 450 waterway or port security operations, opens 38 federal cases for
law violations, monitors more than 2,500 commercial vessels entering or exit-
ing ports of entry, confiscates 39 pounds of marijuana and 324 pounds of co-
caine, arrests 15 illegal immigrants, and enforces 103 security zones.
Since the unprecedented loss of life and the disruption of domestic com-
merce that came with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Coast
Guard has faced significant challenges as it has defended ports, waterways, and
maritime industries. Even before these attacks, however, the Coast Guard had a
desperate need to replace its aging and technologically deficient fleet of equip-
ment. The Coast Guard’s increased responsibilities have made correcting
those shortcomings a major area of concern for adequate domestic security.
To maintain the Coast Guard’s state of preparedness and intelligence nec-
essary to prevent and intervene in terrorist threats, a new generation of boats,
cutters, fixed-wing aircraft, and helicopters was under development in 2005.
This state-of-the-art system, known as the Integrated Deepwater System (IDS),
was designed to integrate, link, and network all new equipment assets, both
within the Coast Guard and between the Coast Guard and other military and
government agencies. The new system promised to be a highly effective, effi-
cient, and intelligent use of resources, equipment, and manpower by estab-
lishing a fully integrated communications system. After it is fully imple-
mented, it is expected to provide a modern infrastructure to support the
Coast Guard’s increasingly complex operations.
Denise Paquette Boots
173
Coolies
Further Reading
Beard, Tom, Jose Hanson, and Paul Scotti, eds. The Coast Guard. Westport,
Conn.: Hugh Lauter Levin, 2004. Containing a foreword by veteran broad-
cast journalist Walter Cronkite, this illustrated book covers the duty, his-
tory, life, and devotion of the Coast Guard and its people through a num-
ber of essays and contributors.
Johnson, Robert Erwin. Guardians of the Sea: History of the U.S. Coast Guard,
1915 to the Present. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1987. Compre-
hensive and detailed account of the history of the Coast Guard from the
early twentieth century through the 1980’s. It offers explicit accounts of
rescues, military operations, and more.
Krietemeyer, George. The Coast Guardsman’s Manual. 9th ed. Annapolis, Md.:
Naval Institute Press, 2000. Designed for members of the Coast Guard, this
book offers a thorough overview of the Coast Guard history, uniforms, and
operations, and is mandatory reading for recruits in boot camp.
Ostrom, Thomas. The United States Coast Guard: 1790 to the Present. Oakland,
Oreg.: Elderberry Press, 2004. Written for serious scholars of American
military and agency history, this book offers an exhaustive history of the
Coast Guard.
White, Jonathan R. Defending the Homeland: Domestic Intelligence, Law Enforce-
ment, and Security. Stamford, Conn.: Wadsworth, 2003. Survey of law en-
forcement in the United States discussing how the criminal justice system
has changed since September 11, 2001.
See also Chinese detentions in New York; Cuban refugee policy; González
rescue; Haitian boat people; Homeland Security Department; Mariel boatlift.
Coolies
Definition: Pejorative term of the past for unskilled laborers from Asia, par-
ticularly those from the Far East
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Labor; Slavery;

Stereotypes
Significance: Already discriminated against and treated poorly by their

American employers, Asian laborers who were regarded as “coolies” faced
additional stigmatization and mistreatment.
“Coolie” derives from a Tamil word meaning hireling and was adapted by the
British to refer to unskilled laborers in India and the Far East in the seven-
teenth century. The word was also used to describe unskilled five-year con-
174
Coolies
Chinese mine workers traveling on a railroad handcart. Often called “coolie hats,” the broad coni-
cal straw hats worn by Chinese laborers became one of the defining characteristics of “coolies.”
(Asian American Studies Library, University of California at Berkeley)
tract laborers, usually Indian or Chinese, working for low wages in exchange
for free passage to British or Dutch colonies. Conditions were abysmal in the
depots where the passengers waited and even worse on the ships, producing
death rates comparable to those during the former slave trade. Horrid work
conditions awaited the survivors.
With the influx of Chinese to the United States following the California
gold rush of 1849, the pejorative term “coolie” was adapted to refer to any
Chinese immigrant, creating the fiction that Chinese people were all slave la-
borers brought to the United States as part of a conspiracy to avoid paying de-
cent wages to American workers. The racist coolie stereotype also connoted
spreaders of disease, gambling, opium, prostitution, and heathenistic reli-
gious practices. As Chinese laborers helped build the railroads and worked in
mines (often during strikes), this dehumanizing stereotype encouraged anti-
Chinese riots and lynchings during the 1870’s. Although only 105,000 Chi-
nese had come to the United States by 1880, pressure from labor and western
politicians resulted in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, banning all Chi-
nese immigration.
Irwin Halfond
Further Reading
175
Cuban immigrants
1870. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964.
Chinese, 1795-1882. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969.
See also Alien land laws; Asian American stereotypes; Burlingame Treaty;
Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese immi-
and family customs; Page law; Wong Kim Ark case.
Cuban immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Caribbean island of
Cuba
Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Demographics; Latino immigrants;

Refugees; West Indian immigrants
Significance: Large numbers of Cuban refugees entered the United States

during the second half of the nineteenth century and during the 1960’s
and 1980’s. Their tightly knit, prosperous communities, and later, their
sheer numbers, caused racial tension and conflict, particularly with Afri-
can American communities in Miami, into the twenty-first century.
In 1959, Fidel Castro led a popular revolt that toppled the government of
Fulgencio Batista y Zaldívar in Cuba. A small number of Cubans who had sym-
pathized with the Batista government fled to the United States. This tiny
trickle of wealthy Cubans grew to torrential proportions as more and more
people became dissatisfied with the new regime. The immigrants who came
in this migratory wave, like those who came in the two that preceded it, met
with discrimination and racial tensions in their new home.
Early Immigrants Twice before, large numbers of Cubans had sought ref-
uge from war by traveling to the United States and various Latin American na-
tions. The first group left Cuba between 1868 and 1878 during the battle for
independence known in Cuba as the Ten Years’ War. Most of the Cubans went
to the Florida cities of Key West and Tampa, although some relocated in New
York City and New Orleans. After the peace accord was signed in 1878, many
Cubans returned to the island, although quite a large number remained in
both Key West and Tampa (actually Ybor City) to work in the newly estab-
lished tobacco factories.
176
Cuban immigrants
These early immigrants—whose descendants still live in the area—formed

tightly knit communities that revolved around the Roman Catholic Church
and Spanish culture. Because the principal reason for the migration had
been political, not economic, most Cubans viewed their time in the United
States as temporary. Perhaps for this reason, they assimilated to a lesser extent
than most immigrant groups and did not adopt many American norms or
much of the culture. This was a major cause of tension between Cubans and
the established population.
The end of the nineteenth century brought another large influx of Cu-
bans. When the Cuban War of Independence started in February, 1895, and
as conditions on the island deteriorated, large numbers of Cubans migrated
to the United States and Latin America. As in the previous migration, Cubans
settled mostly in Florida and other large eastern American cities. This time,
the immigrants did not suffer as much culture shock because the Cubans who
remained behind after the end of the Ten Years’ War provided a ready-made
Cuban American community where they could settle.
Fidel Castro at the time of his accession to power in Cuba in 1959. (Library of Congress)
177
Cuban immigrants
Cuban Immigration to the United States,

1921-2003
35,000
30,000
1959
25,000 Castro takes

power
20,000 1980
Mariel
15,000 boatlift
10,000
5,000
0
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Source: U.S . Census Bureau.
Twentieth Century The Cuban War of Independence, which in the United

States became known as the Spanish-American War (1898), lasted three years,
during which Cuban exiles lived in communities separated in many ways from
the local population. Then, in 1953, Fidel Castro began a revolt against the
corrupt government of Fulgencio Batista y Zaldívar that resulted in the Cuban
Revolution and Castro’s socialization of the economy under a communist-
allied government. By the early 1960’s, when the wave of Cubans fleeing the
Castro regime arrived, many of the Cuban Americans were second- or third-
generation Americans and did not have a lot in common with the newer arriv-
als. Therefore, the post-Castro Cubans had to contend with the criticisms of
the older, established Cuban Americans.
The first wave of post-Castro Cubans arrived immediately after Castro took
over. Shortly after the United States and Cuba broke diplomatic relations in
January, 1960, the next migratory wave began. In this wave were more than
fifty thousand children without their parents, who were brought to the
United States by a former president of Cuba and other Cubans, the U.S. Cath-
olic Welfare Bureau, and Senator George A. Smathers of Florida.
The next large wave was made up of refugees who arrived on the Freedom
Flights initiated by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the mid-1960’s. Two
178
Cuban immigrants
daily flights brought thousands of Cubans, straining the economy of Florida,

where most of them settled. Working-class Americans, especially African
Americans in Miami, suffered when jobs were lost to workers willing to work
for any wage simply to have employment. During this time, many Cubans, for-
merly professionals, worked menial jobs while they attended night school in
order to perfect their English and perhaps return to their chosen profes-
sions.
During the 1970’s, the number of Cuban refugees fell, and many earlier ar-
rivals began to move away from Miami’s Little Havana to its suburbs or to
other southern cities. By the time the Mariel boatlift of 1980 started, the early
refugees were enjoying a high standard of living and were able to help the
new arrivals establish themselves. However, the boatlift strained the public re-
sources of southern Florida and created racial tensions. A riot broke out in
the African American community in Miami after the acquittal of a Hispanic
police officer who shot an African American. After much destruction, order
was restored although the underlying tension did not go away. Congress
passed the 1980 Refugee Act, which substantially lowered the number of Cu-
ban refugees that could be admitted each year.
Cuban Americans constitute the third largest Hispanic group in the
United States, after Mexican Americans and Puerto Ricans. Because the ear-
lier waves of Cuban refugees were composed of middle- to upper-class Cu-
bans, the south Florida area has experienced tremendous growth. Studies
suggest that significant differences exist between refugees—like the Cu-
bans—who migrate for political reasons and those who migrate for economic
reasons.
The Cuban American community is very tightly knit, although its members
vary greatly in their cultural affiliations: Some members follow Cuban cus-
toms and traditions; others tend to live more or less typical American life-
styles. One attribute that separates Cuban Americans from other immigrant
groups is their staunchly anti-communist stance. Although other immigrant
groups have softened their stance on communists in China or Vietnam, the
Cuban American community, especially in Miami, has tended to view this
change in stance as a weakness. This attitude is likely to prevail until the com-
munity is predominantly second- and third-generation Cuban Americans.
Peter E. Carr
Further Reading For a thorough review of Cuban Americans, see

Thomas D. Boswell and James R. Curtis’s The Cuban American Experience
(Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Allanheld, 1983), which Michele Zebich-Knos and
Heather Nicol’s Foreign Policy Toward Cuba: Isolation or Engagement? (Lanham,
Md.: Lexington Books, 2005) helps to bring up-to-date. Robert M. Levine and
Moisés Asís’s Cuban Miami (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press,
2000) explores the Cuban immigrant community of South Florida, which is
home to the bulk of the nation’s Cuban immigrants. Other informative
179
Cuban immigrants and African Americans
sources include John Crewdson’s The Tarnished Door: The New Immigrants and
the Transformation of America (New York: Times Books, 1983), Raul Moncarz
and Jorge Antonio’s “Cuban Immigration to the United States” in Contem-
porary American Immigration, edited by Dennis Laurence Cuddy (Boston:
Twayne, 1982), Norman Zucker’s “Contemporary American Immigration
and Refugee Policy: An Overview,” in Journal of Children in Contemporary Society
(15, no. 3, Spring, 1983). For other useful sources, see Lyn MacCorkle’s Cu-
bans in the United States: A Bibliography for Research in the Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 1960-1983 (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1984). Ellen Alexander
Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants (Berkeley: University of Califor-
nia Press, 2004) is a collection of firsthand accounts of modern immigrants
from many nations, including Cuba. Ethnicities: Children of Immigrants in Amer-
ica (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001), edited by Rubén G.
Rumbaut and Alejandro Portes, is a collection of papers on demographic and
family issues relating to immigrants that includes a chapter on Cubans.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Cuban immigrants and African Amer-

icans; Cuban refugee policy; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; González rescue;
Haitian immigrants; Latinos; Latinos and employment; Little Havana; Mariel
boatlift; Santería.
Cuban immigrants and

African Americans
Immigration issues: African Americans; Cuban immigrants; Latino immi-
grants; West Indian immigrants
Significance: The tension that arose between African Americans and post-
1959 Cuban refugees in the Miami area of Florida represents an illuminat-
ing case study of the effects of immigration on urban racial and ethnic rela-
tions during the late twentieth century.
During the late twentieth century, the attitude of African Americans and
their organizations to immigration was one of ambivalence. As a minority
group, African Americans could not consistently oppose immigration as a
threat to some imagined American cultural or ethnic purity. Yet many African
Americans, struggling against discrimination and disadvantage, feared immi-
grants as competitors for scarce jobs and public services. In Dade County,
Florida, unrestricted immigration from Cuba after Fidel Castro took power in
1959 fed Miami African Americans’ anxieties about economic displacement
180
and political disempowerment. The black riots that erupted in Miami in

1980, 1982, and 1989, although ostensibly sparked by police brutality, were
widely ascribed by contemporary commentators as resentment against Cu-
ban refugees.
Cuban Refugees Tensions between African Americans and black immi-

grants from Jamaica and Haiti have been mitigated somewhat by a shared Af-
rican heritage; with the refugee flow from Cuba, however, this factor did not
come into play as much. When Castro took power in Cuba in 1959, people of
full or partial African descent constituted nearly 40 percent of the total popu-
lation of Cuba; yet 90 percent or more of the Cuban refugees of the 1960’s
and early 1970’s were white. It was not until the Mariel boatlift of May to Sep-
tember, 1980, that the proportion of Afro-Cubans in the refugee flow came to
approximate that of the island’s population.
By the beginning of 1980, many of the Cuban refugees of the 1960’s and
early 1970’s, who had arrived nearly penniless, had grown prosperous. Such
success was due to the relatively high proportion of professionals and entre-
preneurs among the earliest refugees, the refugees’ hard work, and the gen-
erous financial assistance that the refugees, as defectors from a communist
regime, received from the federal government to help defray the costs of
vocational training and retraining, transportation, and resettlement. African
Americans complained that the refugees received more assistance than ei-
ther other immigrants or poor native-born Americans did. The Mariel boat-
lift refugees of May to September, 1980, and refugees who arrived after that
year did not, however, receive as much government help as the earlier waves
of immigrants.
African Americans also complained about the way refugees benefited from
federal programs not specifically targeted at refugees. When affirmative ac-
tion policies were implemented during the late 1960’s to provide set-asides
for minority businesses, Hispanics were considered to be a minority and Cu-
bans were Hispanics; hence, refugee-owned businesses were judged to qualify
as minority-owned businesses. Local African Americans resented what they
saw as poaching by white newcomers on an entitlement originally intended
for African Americans.
Cubans’ Immigration Status as Bone of Contention From 1959 to

1980, few Cubans reaching U.S. shores were deported. The Cuban Adjust-
ment Act of 1966 enabled all Cuban refugees to change their status to that of
permanent resident after one year of living in the United States; other immi-
grants did not enjoy this privilege. After 1972, more and more Haitians, like
Cubans, tried to reach the United States. Cubans fleeing by boat were always
welcomed. In contrast, Haitians fleeing by boat were unceremoniously sent
back to Haiti if intercepted at sea, detained in prison if they reached Florida,
and often deported. Although the official justification for the disparity in
treatment was ideological (Cuba was communist; Haiti was not), many Miami
181
black activists perceived racism. Many Cuban escapees were white; almost all
Haitian escapees were black. In May, 1995, U.S. president Bill Clinton offi-
cially ended the privileged status of Cuban refugees. When the first Cuban es-
capees were sent back to Cuba, on May 10, Miami Cubans staged a four-day ac-
tion of civil disobedience; Miami’s native-born African Americans stayed away
from the protest.
Between 1968 and 1989, there were several episodes of rioting by black
Miamians, the bloodiest of which took place in 1980. The riots of 1980, 1982,
and 1989 were widely attributed by journalists and scholars to the resentment
of Miami African Americans against Cuban refugees, although this was only
one reason. All the riots stemmed from responses to alleged police misuse of
force. In 1982 and 1989, the officers who used force were Hispanic, and Cu-
bans did tend to rally around Hispanic police officers accused of brutality.
Yet conflict between African Americans and police officers had existed even
before the mass arrival of Cuban refugees. Although one victim of black vio-
lence during the 1980 riot was a Cuban refugee, other victims were non-
Hispanic whites: The mob was as much anti-white as anti-Cuban. Nor were
native-born African Americans the only ones to complain about police brutal-
ity. In 1992, an incident of police violence against a Haitian in a Cuban-owned
store aroused protest; and in 1990, Miami’s Puerto Ricans also rioted against
an alleged police abuse of force.
Whether Cuban refugees gained occupationally at the expense of Miami’s
African Americans is a controversial issue, although local black leaders lodged
complaints about such displacement as early as the early 1960’s. Allegations
that Cubans ousted African Americans from service jobs in hotels and restau-
rants were met by counterallegations that African Americans were themselves
leaving such jobs voluntarily and that the percentage of Miami African Ameri-
cans in white-collar jobs had increased by 1980. By founding many new busi-
nesses, Cuban refugees created jobs; many such jobs, however, went to fellow
refugees rather than to African Americans. As the Hispanic population grew
and trade links with Latin America expanded, native-born African Americans
were hurt by the job requirement of fluency in Spanish. Although the Miami
area economic pie grew during the 1960’s and 1970’s, African Americans’
slice of that pie, scholars concede, was stagnant; compared with pre-1980 Cu-
ban refugees, they suffered in 1980 from greater poverty and unemployment
and had a lower rate of entrepreneurship.
Black-Cuban Conflict in Local Politics From 1960 to 1990, the His-

panic percentage of Dade County’s population (most, but not all of it, Cu-
ban) rose from barely 10 percent to 49 percent; the black percentage of the
county’s population never rose above 20 percent. By the late 1970’s, more
and more Cuban refugees were becoming naturalized U.S. citizens, gaining
both the right to vote and a decisive weight in local politics. In 1983, the
Puerto Rican-born mayor dismissed the black city manager, replacing him
with a Cuban. Cuban American candidates defeated African American candi-
182
dates for the posts of mayor of Miami in 1985, Dade County Schools superin-
tendent in 1990, Dade County district attorney in 1993, and mayor of Dade
County in 1996. The Cuban influx into elective politics prevented a black
takeover of city hall (as had taken place in Atlanta, Georgia, and Detroit,
Michigan), thereby reducing the chances for black businesspeople to benefit
from municipal contracts. Yet African Americans’ powerlessness was relative:
They could vote and affect the outcome of elections.
In spring of 1990, Mayor Xavier Suar persuaded the Miami city govern-
ment to withdraw its official welcome to Nelson Mandela, the leader of the
black liberation struggle in South Africa, who was then touring the United
States. Mandela, in a television interview, had praised Castro. Partly in re-
sponse to this slap at Mandela, a Miami black civil rights leader, H. T. Smith,
called for a nationwide boycott by black organizations of Miami-area hotels;
this boycott was remarkably effective. It was ended in 1993 with an agreement
promising greater efforts to employ African Americans in Miami’s hospitality
industry.
Complexities of Miami-area Interethnic Relations Dade County’s

politics were not simply a Cuban-African American struggle. Sometimes Afri-
can Americans saw non-Hispanic whites as allies against the Cubans: In his
losing bid for Congress against a Cuban American in 1989, the non-Hispanic
white candidate won most of the black votes. Sometimes African Americans
saw both Cubans and non-Hispanic whites as oppressors of African Ameri-
cans. In a lawsuit that met with success in 1992, African Americans and Cu-
bans cooperated in an effort to make the Dade County Commission more
representative of ethnic minorities.
African Americans did not always form a united front against the Cubans:
In a 1980 referendum ending the provision of Spanish-language documents
and services by the Dade County government, black voters split, 44 percent
for the proposition and 56 percent against. (Bilingualism was restored in
1993.) Haitians and native-born African Americans did not agree on all is-
sues; among non-Hispanic whites, white ethnic migrants from the North did
not always agree with white Anglo-Saxon Protestants of southern back-
ground; and some of Miami’s non-Cuban Hispanics resented Cuban predom-
inance.
In other major U.S. cities, Cubans were, if present at all, a smaller part of
the larger Hispanic group. Only in Miami did Hispanics build up a power-
ful political machine; hence, black resentment of Hispanic political power
played little role in race relations elsewhere. The police brutality issue also
operated differently: in Compton, California, Washington, D.C., and Detroit,
Michigan, for example, there were complaints, during the early 1990’s, about
alleged brutality by black police officers against Hispanics.
Paul D. Mageli
183
Cuban refugee policy
Further Reading This Land Is Our Land: Immigrants and Power in Miami
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003) by Alex Stepick and others is a
study of competitition and conflict among Miami’s largest ethnic groups—
Cubans, Haitians, and African Americans. In Imagining Miami (Charlottes-
ville: University Press of Virginia, 1997), the best introductory study, Sheila
Croucher attacks the notion that either the black or the Cuban community is
a monolith. Her analysis of the Mandela affair and the subsequent boycott is
especially enlightening. Marvin Dunn’s Black Miami in the Twentieth Century
(Tallahassee: University of Florida Press, 1997) is informative on the riots.
On the politics of bilingualism, consult Max Castro’s essay in Guillermo J.
Grenier and Alex Stepick’s Miami Now! (Tallahassee: University Press of
Florida, 1992). The displacement thesis is presented most clearly in historian
Raymond A. Mohl’s “On the Edge: Blacks and Hispanics in Metropolitan Mi-
ami Since 1959,” Florida Historical Quarterly (69, no. 1, July, 1990). For rebut-
tals of this thesis, consult chapter 3 of Alex Stepick and Alejandro Portes’s City
on the Edge: The Transformation of Miami (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1993) and Alex Stepick and Guillermo Grenier’s “Cubans in Miami,” in
In the Barrios: Latinos and the Underclass Debate, edited by Joan Moore and
Raquel Pinderhughes (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1993). City on the
Edge is also informative on Miami’s Haitians. For a general study of racial is-
sues relating to West Indian immigrants, see Milton Vickerman’s Crosscurrents:
West Indian Immigrants and Race (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).
Immigration and Opportunity: Race, Ethnicity, and Employment in the United States
(New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), edited by Frank D. Bean and
Stephanie Bell-Rose, is a collection of essays on economic and labor issues re-
lating to race and immigration in the United States, with particular attention
See also Cuban immigrants; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Irish immi-

grants and African Americans; Little Havana; Mariel boatlift; Refugees and
racial/ethnic relations; Santería.

Definition: Changing federal government policy regarding the immigra-
tion of Cuban refugees
Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Refugees; West Indian immigrants
Significance: In 1994, in a decision reflecting a broad shift in American atti-

tudes toward immigration, President Bill Clinton ended the long-standing
practice of automatically granting asylum to Cubans fleeing their country.
184
During the first half of August, 1994, thousands of Cubans, determined to

flee their island nation’s poverty and repression, set out from the port of
Cojimar in makeshift rafts, braving shark-filled waters in an effort to reach
southern Florida, ninety miles away. There, they assumed, freedom and a
better life awaited them.
For almost three decades, the United States government had granted asy-
lum automatically to virtually all Cubans who reached United States soil. As
more and more Cuban refugees landed at Key West, Governor Lawton Chiles,
Jr., of Florida pleaded with President Bill Clinton to do something about the
influx. Chiles, running for reelection, feared that Florida taxpayers would re-
bel against the costs that a fresh wave of refugees might impose on the state.
On the evening of August 18, 1994, Clinton’s attorney general, Janet Reno,
announced at a hastily assembled news conference that Cuban refugees
would no longer be entitled to automatic asylum. On the following after-
noon, Clinton, in a televised press conference, repeated Reno’s statement.
He warned that Cubans intercepted at sea by the U.S. Coast Guard would
henceforth no longer be taken to Florida; instead, they would be transferred
to the U.S. naval base at Guantánamo Bay, at the eastern tip of Cuba, for de-
tention for an indefinite period. In the future, Clinton proclaimed, Cubans
who claimed refugee status would have to prove that they were threatened by
persecution. Each individual case would be examined by the American inter-
ests section of the Swiss embassy in Havana. On September 9, 1994, after ne-
gotiations between the Cuban and United States governments, Fidel Castro,
Cuba’s leader, promised to stop further attempts by rafters to flee Cuba. In re-
turn, the United States agreed to accept about twenty thousand immigrants
from Cuba per year.
Anticommunism Versus Xenophobia In making his decision, Clinton re-

sponded to two strands of American public opinion: animosity toward immi-
grants and refugees in general, and a deep-rooted hostility to Cuba’s leader,
Castro. After taking power in January, 1959, Castro expropriated American-
owned property without compensation and converted Cuba into a Commu-
nist state allied with the Soviet Union, America’s archrival in the Cold War. In
1961, the United States broke diplomatic relations with Cuba, and in 1963, it
imposed a trade embargo on the island nation. Castro’s espousal of Commu-
nism was only one reason that so many Americans disliked him; another was
the humiliation of having to tolerate an outspoken foe of the United States
on an island that had been within the United States sphere of influence be-
fore 1959. The Cuban exile community that developed in Miami, Florida,
provided a focus of anti-Castro sentiment on American soil.
From 1959 to 1962—when commercial airplane flights from the island
were halted—about 200,000 Cubans fled their homeland. In late 1965, spe-
cial “Freedom Flights” were organized with Castro’s cooperation. Although
registration for these flights was closed in 1966, the flights themselves contin-
ued until 1973. The last mass influx of Cubans before 1994 was the Mariel
185
Image Not Available
boatlift of May to September, 1980, which took about 125,000 Cubans to

American soil. Between 1980 and 1994, Castro forbade emigration.
During the economic boom years of the 1960’s and early 1970’s, neither
the extreme liberality of the United States government’s asylum policy to-
ward Cubans nor the extensive financial assistance Washington offered Cu-
ban refugees between 1962 and 1976 aroused much resentment among
Americans. The Cuban refugees’ flight to the United States was widely hailed
as a propaganda victory for democracy in its worldwide struggle with commu-
nism, and their climb up the socioeconomic ladder in the United States was
widely applauded as a triumph of hard work and determination.
As the American economy came to be beset by frequent short-term down-
turns and various long-term problems, many people in the United States
came to view immigrants and refugees from Latin America as unwelcome
competitors for jobs and public services. As president, Clinton heard wide-
spread calls for cutbacks in legal immigration and witnessed widespread
alarm over illegal immigration.
In 1994, Clinton still had bitter memories of the 1980 Mariel boatlift. Presi-
dent Jimmy Carter had ordered those refugees who lacked close relatives or
other sponsors in the United States to be interned in camps across the United
States until their fate could be determined bureaucratically. In June, 1980, a
riot took place in a camp in Arkansas, where Clinton was then governor.
Clinton later came to believe that popular indignation over the Mariel boat-
186
lift had cost him his chance of being reelected to the governorship in Novem-
ber, 1980, and had also contributed to the defeat of Carter’s bid for reelection
to the presidency in the same year.
In 1992, the U.S. Congress passed the Cuban Democracy Act, which fur-
ther tightened a thirty-year-old embargo. Serious shortages of oil and of med-
icine began to be felt in Cuba. Signs of malnutrition began to appear among
its people and, on August 5, 1994, a riot erupted in Havana. The riot persuaded
Castro to permit limited emigration by those who wanted to leave. The need
to keep already bad relations with the United States from becoming worse
moved him to crack down on emigration once again in September, 1994.
Consequences In a second agreement with Castro, signed on May 2, 1995,

Clinton promised that the Coast Guard would intercept at sea all Cubans flee-
ing their country and return them to Cuba. Those Cubans already interned
in Guantánamo would be allowed to enter the United States. By early August,
1995, about half of the Guantánamo internees had been admitted to the
United States, and the internment camp was slated to be closed by March,
1996.
The 1994 Cuban influx and Clinton’s effort to stop it probably helped shift
the debate in the U.S. Congress against advocates of free immigration and in
favor of restrictionists. Proposals for reducing the total number of immi-
grants and refugees admitted to the United States, cracking down more se-
verely on illegal immigration, and excluding legal aliens from certain welfare
state benefits seemed to have better prospects of being enacted into law.
Paul D. Mageli
Further Reading
Boswell, Thomas D. A Demographic Profile of Cuban Americans. Miami: Cuban
American National Council, 2002.
Cohen, Steve. Deportation Is Freedom! The Orwellian World of Immigration Con-
trols. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley, 2005.
Hamm, Mark S. The Abandoned Ones: The Imprisonment and Uprising of the Mariel
Boat People. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1995.
Legomsky, Stephen H. Immigration and Refugee Law and Policy. 3d ed. New
York: Foundation Press, 2002.
Masud-Piloto, Felix R. From Welcomed Exiles to Illegal Immigrants. Lanham, Md.:
Rowman & Littlefield, 1996.
Zebich-Knos, Michele, and Heather Nicol. Foreign Policy Toward Cuba: Isolation
or Engagement? Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2005.
See also Cuban immigrants; Cuban immigrants and African Americans;

Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy;
Mariel boatlift; Model minorities; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
187
Cultural pluralism
Cultural pluralism
Definition: Approach to cultural diversity that emphasizes intergroup toler-
ance and the maintenance of cultural distinctions among groups, in con-
trast to assimililation
Immigration issue: Sociological theories
Significance: Cultural pluralism rejects the melting pot theory of cultural

assimilation, with its emphasis on Anglo-conformity.
The concept of cultural pluralism has its origins in a 1915 essay by educator
and social philosopher Horace Kallen, who argued—during an era rife with
xenophobia, nativism, and anti-immigrant attitudes—that ethnic groups had
a right to exist on their own terms, retaining their unique cultural heritage
while enjoying full participation in, and the benefits of, a democratic society.
Beyond the Melting Pot (1970), a controversial book by Nathan Glazer and Dan-
iel Patrick Moynihan, expanded Kallen’s early concept and revived the in-
tense debate over the degree to which immigrant customs should, or would,
survive with passing generations. In a new nation, Moynihan and Glazer ar-
gued, few vestiges of the immigrant culture would remain. Decades later,
opinions of Beyond the Melting Pot still run a broad spectrum from praise to
condemnation, but the book probably introduced one of the most important
social science dialogues of the twentieth century.
Growing evidence of multiculturalism in the United States can be read in signs such as that of a Mi-
ami merchant clock repair service that is patronized by both English- and Spanish-speaking peo-
ple. (Library of Congress)
188
Cultural pluralism
Much of the debate over cultural pluralism has focused on the issues of bi-
lingual (and multicultural) education in public schools and universities. The
high point of disagreement appears to be over the concept of assimilationism
versus multiculturalism. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and others have argued that
different ethnic groups in the United States share a common culture, and
that cultural pluralism is not a model for which the United States should
strive. Critics respond that the melting pot paradigm is a fantasy, and that
“vegetable soup” or “tossed salad” might be more accurate models. They also
point out that if society blends itself into one culture, the cultural values of
that finished product will probably be strongly European. Asiatic, African,
and Hispanic cultures would not survive the meltdown.
Christopher Guillebeau
Further Reading
Baghramian, Maria, and Attracta Ingram, eds. Pluralism: The Philosophy and
Politics of Diversity. New York: Routledge, 2000. Collection of scholarly es-
says on a wide variety of aspects of cultural pluralism.
Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2001. Reconsideration of the melting pot the-
ory in the context of early twenty-first century America.
controversial issues relating to immigration, including the impact of cul-
tural diversity on American society.
Brooks, Stephen, ed. The Challenge of Cultural Pluralism. Westport, Conn.:
Praeger, 2002. Collection of essays on cultural pluralism in modern world
history. Includes chapters on theoretical aspects of the subject and on plu-
ralism in Canada.
Buenker, John D., and Lorman A. Ratner, eds. Multiculturalism in the United
States: A Comparative Guide to Acculturation and Ethnicity. Rev. ed. Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2005. Up-to-date collection of essays on aspects
of pluralism.
nic Minority Policies. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003. Sociological study of
the dynamics of power relationships among different ethnic groups.
Denton, Nancy A., and Stewart E. Tolnay, eds. American Diversity: A Demo-
graphic Challenge for the Twenty-First Century. Albany: State University of New
York Press, 2002. Collection of papers presented at a conference on ethnic
diversity in the United States.
189
Demographics of immigration
Vermeulen, Hans, and Joel Perlmann, eds. Immigrants, Schooling, and Social
Mobility: Does Culture Make a Difference? New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000.
Collected papers from a 1996 conference on culture and worldwide immi-
gration that was held in Amsterdam.
See also Assimilation theories; English-only and official English move-

ments; European immigrant literature; Generational acculturation; Settle-
ment house movement.
Demographics of
immigration
Definition: Characteristics of immigration populations that can be mea-
sured statistically
Immigration issues: Border control; Chinese immigrants; Demographics
Significance: Although the forces underlying immigration to North Amer-

ica have remained essentially unaltered throughout the histories of the
United States and Canada as nations, the primary sources of immigrants to
each country have changed. Until the late twentieth century, Europe sup-
plied the overwhelming majority of immigrants to both countries, but by
the beginning of the twentieth century, Asia had become the principal
supplier of immigrants.
The United States has experienced four major waves of immigration. In the
first wave, between 1790 and 1820, most immigrants came from Great Britain
and spoke English. During the second wave, from 1840 to 1860, the majority
of immigrants were from northern and western Europe, most particularly Ire-
land and Germany. The third wave, from 1880 to 1914, is characterized by a
transition in sources from northern and western Europe to southern and
eastern Europe. This wave is associated with a peak period of U.S. immigra-
tion. In 1907, a record 1.3 million immigrants entered the country, with Italy
accounting for more than 20 percent of this total. The outbreak of World
War I effectively ended European immigration—numbers declined from 1 mil-
lion in 1914 to 31,000 in 1918.
The transition in immigrant sources aroused nativist sentiments among
older immigrant groups. Fear of Asian immigration, for example, led the U.S.
Congress to enact the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882. Other Asian groups
were added to the exclusion list with the creation of the Asiatic Barred Zone
in the 1917 Immigration Act. The justification for excluding these groups was
190
found in racist theories of Anglo-Saxon superiority. The U.S. Congress re-

sponded to public pressure to curtail immigration from southern and eastern
Europe by enacting the National Origins Quota system in 1924. Under this
system, immigrant visas were apportioned for each country according to its
contribution to the U.S. population in 1910.
Because Britain, Ireland, and Germany had provided the largest number
of immigrants, they received the largest quotas. No restrictions were placed
on immigration from the Western Hemisphere, largely in response to U.S. ag-
ricultural interests that wanted access to cheap Mexican labor that could be
recruited when needed. In 1952, the so-called Texas Proviso was added to im-
migration law; the proviso exempted employers from sanctions for hiring un-
documented workers. This had the effect of increasing illegal immigration af-
ter the United States ended its formal system of hiring agricultural workers,
the bracero program, in 1964. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control
Act made it illegal for employers to hire undocumented workers.
Immigration levels declined from 1924 to 1945 as a result of the National
Origins system, the Great Depression, and World War II. After 1945 U.S. con-
cerns with immigrant origins (that is, worries about race) were replaced with
concerns about immigrant skills and educational background (the United
States, amply populated, began to wish only for immigrants who could con-
tribute to the economy).
Changing U.S. Immigration Policies In 1965, the secretary of state tes-

tified before the House Judiciary Committee that the significance of immi-
gration to the United States “now depends less on the numbers than on the
quality of immigrants. . . . We are in the international market of brains.” Re-
strictions on immigration from Asia and southern and eastern Europe were
gradually removed during and after World War II. The National Origins sys-
tem was formally replaced by the 1965 amendments to the Immigration and
Nationality Act, which allocated an annual ceiling of 170,000 immigrants for
the Eastern Hemisphere and 120,000 for the Western Hemisphere.
Within this overall ceiling, a system of priority categories was established
based upon family reunification criteria and labor requirements, with the im-
mediate relatives of U.S. citizens being exempt from the numerical cap. In
1990, a global quota of 714,000 immigrants was established for 1992 to 1994,
and 675,000 beginning in 1995, with the majority of visas being allocated to
spouses, children, and other relatives of U.S. citizens. In addition to this
global quota are refugees, who are admitted under the 1980 Refugee Act,
which had a 1992 ceiling of 142,000 persons and a series of smaller quotas de-
signed for particular groups which have been adversely affected by earlier im-
migration laws.
These changes in legislation have coincided with a fourth wave of immigra-
tion. Since 1970 immigration has gradually increased to approach the record
levels, in raw numbers, that were reached at the beginning of the twentieth
century. The number of immigrants in the fourth wave relative to the rest of
191
Average Annual Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
1,000,000
950,000
900,000
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
the population, however, is far less than at the beginning of the twentieth cen-
tury. During the 1970’s the United States admitted 4.4 million immigrants.
The following decade this figure increased to 7.3 million. In 1993, a total of
904,300 immigrants legally entered the country. Concurrent with this boost
in immigration has been a change in immigrant sources from the “devel-
oped” to the “developing” world.
During the 1960’s, the six leading suppliers of U.S. immigrants were Mexico
(443,300), Canada (286,700), Cuba (256,800), United Kingdom (230,500), It-
aly (206,700), and Germany (200,000). The comparable figures for the 1980’s
were: Mexico (1,653,300), the Philippines (495,300), Vietnam (401,400),
China (388,800), Korea (338,800), and India (261,900). The six leading
sources of immigration during the 1990’s were Mexico (2,249,400), China
192
and Hong Kong (529,000), the Philippines (503,900), former Soviet repub-
lics (462,870), India (363,000), and the Dominican Republic (335,300).
This transformation in immigrant sources is also associated with a change
in immigrant settlement patterns. During the third wave of immigration, the
United States was undergoing industrialization, which meant a large demand
for factory labor in cities. European immigrants settled in Northeastern and
Midwestern industrial cities and transformed the urban landscape. Italian,
Polish, and Greek neighborhoods, for example, grew up around Chicago’s
downtown district. Since the 1950’s, factory closures in such traditional in-
dustries as textiles, automobiles, and steel have reduced the demand for la-
bor and brought long-term economic decline to the region. Economic growth
and the demand for labor have shifted to the rapidly growing service-based
economies of the so-called Sun Belt states, which stretch from Southern Cali-
fornia to Florida. Many of the new immigrant groups have settled in the rap-
idly growing cities of this region. The resulting ethnic diversity from this set-
tlement can be seen in Los Angeles, Houston, and Miami.
Adding to the immigrant population during the early 1990’s was an annual
flow of an estimated 250,000 illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants include
those who overstay a visa (often a student visa) and those who simply walk
across the border. Mexico is the leading source of these migrants, followed by
El Salvador and Guatemala, two Central American countries torn, especially
during the 1980’s, by terrorism and warfare. California contains the largest
number of illegal migrants. The net effect of the fourth wave of immigration
has been to accelerate—not cause—the cultural transition of the United
States from a predominantly white population rooted in western culture to a
diverse society comprising many different ethnic and racial minorities.
Canadian Immigration In 1867, at the time of national confederation,

Canada had a population of 3.2 million. During the following thirty years the
young country struggled to obtain population growth as thousands of Cana-
dians moved to the United States. The post-Confederation National Policy
was designed to help establish the new country. Two aims of the National Pol-
icy were the construction of the transcontinental railroad and homestead set-
tlement in the West.
The Canadian government was fearful of American northward expansion
and annexation, and so viewed immigration to the prairies as an essential
component of nation building. As in the United States, there were concerns
about who immigrated. Chinese workers, for example, had been recruited to
work on the railroad and in lumber camps, and their presence in British Co-
lumbia aroused racist fears. Opposition to the Chinese was particularly pro-
nounced in Vancouver, where a dilapidated Chinatown had been established.
The federal government responded to these nativist sentiments by taxing
Chinese immigration. Later, the Canadian government pressured Japan into
voluntarily limiting its emigrants to four hundred per year.
The beginning of the twentieth century was a boom period in Canadian
193
immigration; 1.5 million immigrants entered the country between 1900 and
1914. In 1913 a record 400,000 arrived in the country. Many of these immi-
grants were from eastern and central Europe and were responding to the
same factors that led their counterparts to settle in the United States. Instead
of settling in urban areas, as in the United States, the Canadian immigrants
generally settled on the prairies in rural ethnic communities. The relative iso-
lation of these small towns and villages helped the immigrants sustain their
cultural identity and in effect laid the foundation for the so-called Canadian
mosaic and later multiculturalism.
After World War I, Canada established a national origins system, classifying
prospective immigrants into ethnic categories: British and Northwest Euro-
peans were classified as “preferred”; central and eastern Europeans “non-
preferred,” while in the “restricted” category were Italians, Greeks, and Jews.
The responsibility for administering this system was transferred to the Cana-
dian Pacific and Canadian National Railways in 1925. These companies owned
vast tracts of land in the West and it was in their interest to sell off this land to
new settlers. As a result, the preference categories were ignored. By the late
1920’s, the majority of Canadian immigrants were from the non-preferred
and restricted categories. The Great Depression and World War II all but
ended immigration to Canada.
Canadian immigration policy changed after World War II. Non-Jewish dis-
placed persons from Europe who had been made homeless by the war were
admitted in 1946; Jews were allowed to immigrate two years later. The ex-
panding industrial economies of Ontario and Quebec needed labor that
could not be supplied from Britain, so the government began an active pro-
immigration policy in 1949. Europe continued to supply most of Canada’s
immigrants during the 1950’s and 1960’s, but the majority of them came from
Italy, Greece, and Portugal. Amendments to the 1952 Immigration and Na-
tionality Act in 1962 and 1966 formally abolished the previous exclusions of
particular racial groups and established a universalistic point system for ad-
mission into the country. Points were awarded for educational attainment,
for the ability to speak the major languages, and for having Canadian family
members. These reforms stemmed from the need to attract professionals to
the expanding scientific, educational, governmental and health care sectors,
from a reduction in racist attitudes, and from an increasing acceptance of
Canada’s multicultural character.
Since 1971, the federal government has actively promoted multicultural-
ism by providing grants for ethnic histories and promoting cultural heritage.
The new admissions policy resulted in a shift away from Europe as the coun-
try’s principal supplier of immigrants. Canadian support for diversity has also
included the appointment in 1972 of the first Minister of State for Multicul-
turalism and the passage in 1988 of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. In
1992, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, India, and the Philippines were the four leading
sources of Canadian immigrants.
In 1994, the province of Ontario, with 37 percent of Canada’s population,
194
Deportation
received 52 percent of Canada’s immigrants, while the comparable figures

for British Columbia were 12 percent and 22 percent respectively. Most immi-
grants of the late twentieth century have settled in urban areas. The 1991 cen-
sus reported that 38 percent or 1.5 million residents of the Toronto metropol-
itan area were immigrants, while the comparable figures for Vancouver and
Montreal were 30 percent and 17 percent respectively.
Michael Broadway
Further Reading
Hughes, James W., and Joseph J. Seneca, eds. America’s Demographic Tapestry:
Baseline for the New Millennium. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University
Press, 1999.
versity Press, 2002.
Massey, Douglas S. “The New Immigration and Ethnicity in the United States.”
Population and Development Review 21, no. 3 (September, 1995): 631-652.
Rumbaut, Rubén G., and Alejandro Portes, eds. Ethnicities: Children of Immi-
grants in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
itics. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000.
See also Arab American intergroup relations; Asian American literature;

Asian American women; Bilingual Education Act of 1968; Censuses, U.S.;
Chinatowns; English-only and official English movements; Hawaiian and Pa-
cific islander immigrants; Israeli immigrants; Jews and Arab Americans; Ko-
rean immigrants and family customs; Racial and ethnic demographic trends;
Vietnamese immigrants.
Deportation
Definition: Forcible removal of noncitizens from the territory of a country
Immigration issues: Border control; Citizenship and naturalization; Civil

rights and liberties; Discrimination; Illegal immigration; Law enforcement
Significance: As a sovereign nation, the United States has always had the au-
thority to deport noncitizens for any reason it chooses. During the 1990’s,
the federal government began using its deportation power on a larger
scale as a weapon against illegal immigration.
195
Deportation
During the 1990’s, as the intensity of the debate over immigration in the
United States steadily rose, church groups, civil libertarians, and immigration
lawyers demanded severe limitations, in the interest of humanitarianism and
due process, on the long-recognized power of the U.S. federal government to
deport noncitizens. President Bill Clinton and the U.S. Congress, by contrast,
insisted on the vigorous exercise of that power to promote greater control
over immigration. From 1992 to 1997 the number of persons deported rose
from 38,000 per year to more than 111,000 per year.
U.S. Citizens as Targets of Deportation Normally, U.S. citizens who

have been born in the United States cannot be deported unless they re-
nounce their U.S. citizenship or lose it as a result of desertion from the mili-
tary in time of war. For example, the U.S.-born writer Margaret Randall, who
lived in Mexico for more than twenty years, was a target of deportation when
she returned to live in the United States for family reasons. Not until the early
1990’s did the campaign to have her ousted from the United States finally
cease. The pretext for the deportation proceedings was Randall’s adoption of
Mexican citizenship (she claimed, in order to make getting a job easier).
Many suspected that her outspoken left-wing views were the real reason for
the deportation effort.
Whether someone is an alien who is susceptible to deportation or a citizen
is determined on legal rather than cultural grounds. Because citizenship was
conferred by the U.S. Congress on Puerto Ricans in 1917, a Spanish-speaking
Puerto Rican living on the mainland cannot be deported to Puerto Rico. On
the other hand; a Spanish-speaking Mexican or an English-speaking Cana-
dian or Australian may be deported to the lands of their birth.
Naturalized citizens are usually immune to deportation unless they are
stripped of their citizenship for having concealed or distorted crucial infor-
mation about themselves. Eastern Europeans or Germans suspected of hav-
ing committed war crimes during World War II (1939-1945) have been the
chief targets of such action. Conceivably, naturalized Americans of Bosnian
or Rwandan background could be stripped of their new citizenship if it were
discovered that they had committed war crimes in the past.
Aliens with Permanent Resident Status Aliens who have been granted
permanent resident status may normally be deported only if they have com-
mitted certain types of crimes. The nature of the crimes that make a resident
alien deportable has varied with changes in the immigration laws. Some of
those deported for crimes have lived in the United States since childhood
and may have few ties to the mother country.
After the passage of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
(AEDPA) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility
Act (IIRIRA) in 1996, complaints arose that too many aliens were being de-
ported for crimes that were relatively minor or that had been committed de-
cades before deportation proceedings were begun. The new laws mandated
196
Deportation
deportation for certain kinds of felonies, but exactly what crime is a felony
and how serious a felony it is can vary from one U.S. state to another. The
post-1996 practice of retroactivity deporting individuals for crimes that would
not have made them targets of deportation prior to the passage of the 1996
laws has also been sharply criticized by some legal scholars and by some
judges in the federal court of appeals.
Nonimmigrant Aliens Those most vulnerable to deportation are foreign-

ers residing in the United States who have never been granted permanent res-
idence status. Such persons include those who entered the United States
without submitting to inspection (the popular notion of “illegal aliens”);
those who have overstayed temporary student, tourist, or work visas; appli-
cants for asylum whose claims are denied; and even those who have fled strife-
torn countries and been admitted to the United States on a temporary basis.
In the latter case, such persons may be deported if the U.S. Congress decides
that the emergency in their homeland has passed, a situation that afflicted
Central Americans admitted to the United States in the turbulent 1980’s who
were threatened with deportation in the supposedly more peaceful 1990’s.
During the late 1990’s most applicants for asylum wound up in deportation
proceedings, although not all of them were actually deported.
Detention pen at Ellis Island in which immigrants are waiting to be deported in 1902. (Library of
Congress)
197
Deportation
Aliens sometimes think that they have permanent residence status when
they actually do not. Marriage to an American citizen, if undertaken in good
faith, can make it possible for an immigrant to gain resident alien status. How-
ever, acquisition of the status of permanent resident does not come automati-
cally with marriage, however; an application for a change of status must be
made, and getting a reply one way or the other can be time-consuming if the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the agency responsible for
noncitizens, is understaffed or overloaded with requests in any given year.
During the late 1990’s, some alien spouses of Americans found themselves
barred from the U.S. after having briefly left the country. With their resident
alien status not yet formally approved, they were still subject to deportation.
Deportation and Due Process The target of deportation efforts by the

federal government does not usually enjoy quite the same level of rights as
the target of criminal prosecution by a local government. Some deportations
of aliens, particularly those who have entered without inspection, can take
place without much protection of individual rights. In other instances, an
alien threatened with deportation can get a hearing before an immigration
judge and can appeal the judge’s decision to the Board of Immigration Ap-
peals (BIA). However, the judges in this system, unlike most federal judges,
possess neither lifetime tenure nor salary guarantees.
Changes in the immigration law passed in 1996 seemed to aim toward re-
ducing the barriers to deportation presented by due process. The right of the
regular federal courts to review deportation decisions has long been a matter
of controversy; legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in 1996 attempted to
severely limit the scope of such judicial review. New restrictions were placed
on those claiming the right of asylum; the window of opportunity to make a
claim for asylum was narrowed, and the right of an official to order out of the
country an alien whose claims seemed unconvincing was broadened.
If asylum applicants have recently arrived in the United States, they can
find themselves detained in prison for a long time until their asylum claims
are decided one way or the other by immigration judges or the Board of Im-
migration Appeals. Whether an asylum seeker is locked up or released into
the community with permission to work depends on which INS district han-
dles the matter, how many beds the nearest detention center has, and on
prevailing attitudes toward immigrants. Before the mid-1990’s most asylum
seekers were released into the community; thereafter, the number of those
detained rose sharply.
In criminal trials the accused have the right to cross-examine witnesses for
the prosecution and to be informed of the exact nature of the evidence
against them. Aliens who are targets of deportation on the grounds of alleged
terrorist activities or any other political activities deemed dangerous to U.S.
national security may be deported on the basis of evidence they are not al-
lowed to see and testimony by witnesses they are not allowed to confront if it is
deemed essential to U.S. national security to keep the evidence and the iden-
198
Deportation
Aliens Expelled and Immigration

Violations, 1985-1991
Item 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Aliens expelled 1,062,000 1,608,000 1,113,000 934,000 860,000 1,045,000 1,091,000
Deported 21,000 22,000 22,000 23,000 30,000 26,000 28,000
Required to depart 1,041,000 1,586,000 1,091,000 911,000 830,000 1,019,000 1,063,000
Prosecutions disposed of 17,688 23,405 18,894 18,360 18,580 20,079 18,882

Immigration violations 16,976 22,751 18,200 17,590 17,992 19,351 18,297
Nationality violations 712 654 694 770 588 728 585
Convictions 9,833 15,259 11,996 12,208 12,561 12,719 11,509

Immigration violations 9,635 15,104 11,786 11,929 12,379 12,515 11,392
Nationality violations 198 155 210 279 182 204 117
Source: U.S . Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States,
1992. Washington, D.C .: U.S . Government Printing Office, 1992.
tity of the prosecution witnesses secret. During the late 1990’s this problem
often arose in the case of aliens from such Middle Eastern countries as Iraq.
Deportation as Punishment There are two rationales for restricting

aliens’ rights. One is the notion that the U.S. Congress has, by law, nearly ab-
solute control over who can migrate to the U.S. (the so-called plenary power
doctrine); the other is the idea that deportation is not a criminal punish-
ment. Because deportation proceedings are carried out under civil rather
than criminal law, deportation is technically not considered to be a punish-
ment. The reality can, however, diverge from legal doctrine. Unlike voluntary
departure from the U.S., deportation severely limits deportees’ rights to re-
enter the United States in the future. Individuals who have been in the
United States only a short time and have been unable to make a living may
welcome deportation to the home country. Persons who have lived in the
United States for many years (sometimes since childhood), who have strong
family and work ties to U.S. citizens and legal residents, and who have no fam-
ily ties in the countries of their origin may view deportation as a catastrophe.
Deporting aliens sometimes means sending them back to certain death at the
hands of a brutal dictatorship.
Hence, immigration judges have, for a long time, been permitted to grant
relief from deportation if an immigrant has sufficient ties (called “equities”)
to the United States. Such relief is not a right but a matter of judicial discre-
tion. Aliens must show that they have lived in the United States a certain mini-
mum number of years (at least seven), that they are of good character, and
that the well-being of family members would be severely damaged if they were
deported. For claimants to asylum, relief from deportation is a matter of right
if they can prove to the satisfaction of an immigration judge or the BIA that
they face a real threat of persecution upon returning to their home countries
199
Deportation
and that no other country besides the United States will admit them. Changes
in the law in 1996 aimed at making such relief from deportation harder for in-
dividual aliens to obtain. Blanket relief from deportation for refugees from
specific countries is a matter of congressional and executive whim. In a 1997
law, for example, such protection against deportation was extended by act of
Congress to Nicaraguans but not to Haitians.
Paul D. Mageli
Further Reading For an up-to-date analysis of the treatment of undocu-

mented immigrants in the United States since the 1960’s, see Rob Staeger’s
Deported Aliens (Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004), which gives particular at-
tention to issues relating to deportation. A good introduction to the subject
of deportation can be found in Nadia Nedzel’s “Immigration Law: A Bird’s
Eye View” in Immigration: Debating the Issues, edited by Nicholas Capaldi (Am-
herst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1997). A look at one protracted case, begun
during the early 1970’s and finally decided during the 1980’s, Barbara Hink-
son Craig’s Chadha: The Story of an Epic Constitutional Struggle (New York: Ox-
ford University Press, 1989) illuminates the relevant legal principles of politi-
cal asylum and relief from deportation in language accessible to lay readers.
Journalist Debbie Nathan’s “Adjustment of Status: The Trial of Margaret Ran-
dall” in Women and Other Aliens: Essays from the U.S.-Mexico Border (El Paso, Tex.:
Cinco Puntos Press, 1991) discusses a rare late twentieth century deportation
case involving a native-born American.
For an insightful study by a legal scholar of the effects of the AEDPA and
the IIRIRA on the law of deportation, see Nancy Morawetz’s “Rethinking Ret-
roactive Deportation Laws and the Due Process Clause” New York University
Law Review, 73 (April, 1998). Allan Wernick, a lawyer who writes on immigra-
tion law for the New York Daily News, has written, for the English-literate immi-
grant U.S. Immigration and Citizenship: Your Complete Guide (Rocklin, Calif.:
Prima, 1997), which offers tips on how to avoid deportation. Syed Refaat
Ahmed’s Forlorn Migrants: An International Legal Regime for Undocumented Mi-
grant Workers (Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press, 2000) provides an inter-
national perspective on deportation issues.
See also Arab immigrants; Border Patrol, U.S.; Chinese Exclusion Act;
Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy; Illegal aliens; Immigration and
Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Mexican deportations during the
Depression; Naturalization; Operation Wetback; Twice migrants; Zadvydas v.
Davis.
200
Discrimination
Discrimination
Definition: Unequal or unfavorable treatment of persons on the basis of
their membership in certain categories or groups, such as racial and eth-
nic minorities
Immigration issues: African Americans; Citizenship and naturalization;

Civil rights and liberties; Discrimination
Significance: Responding to racial and ethnic discrimination and conflict

has been particularly challenging for the U.S. government, given the im-
migrant nature of American society and the long-standing commitment to
the principle of equality before the law in the country’s political culture.
Within the founding documents of the United States are contradictory state-
ments on equality and freedom—and hence on people’s right not to be dis-
criminated against. The Declaration of Independence calls it self-evident that
“All men are created equal” and have “unalienable rights,” yet prior to ratifi-
cation of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865, the Constitution upheld the
institution of slavery, notably in a provision that fugitive slaves must be re-
turned to their owners.
Any new country proclaiming equality while allowing slavery and thinking
of an entire race as inferior is founded on an impossible contradiction, one
that many of the founders undoubtedly realized would have to be faced in the
future. Until the mid-twentieth century, however, the federal government
generally avoided becoming involved in attempts to legislate against discrimi-
nation, allowing the states to establish their own policies. Many of the states,
being closer to the people and their prejudices than the federal government
was, were inclined to condone discrimination and even actively encourage it
through legislation.
Discrimination existed in many different areas of life, including educa-
tion, employment, housing, and voting rights. Two major pieces of legislation
of the 1960’s were designed to attack discrimination in these areas: the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The primary avenue for
fighting discrimination is through the courts, a fact which causes problems of
its own. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), for ex-
ample, has the power to bring lawsuits involving employment discrimination;
however, a huge number of charges of discrimination are brought before the
agency. For that reason, by the mid-1990’s it had a backlog of many thousands
of cases awaiting its attention. In discrimination cases the courts have some-
times applied a standard of discriminatory intent and sometimes relied on a
standard of discriminatory impact.
Some types of discrimination are easier to see and to rectify than others. A
number of activists and legal experts had shifted their attention by the 1980’s
201
Discrimination
to a type of discrimination generally known as “institutional discrimination.”

Institutional discrimination is a type of discrimination that is built into social
or political institutions, frequently in nearly invisible ways. Institutional dis-
crimination is sometimes not even intentional.
Development of the American Nation The framework for the develop-

ment of the United States and its treatment of ethnic minorities was estab-
lished during the first half century of the nation’s history. When the Ameri-
can Revolution ended in 1783, there were few people in the thirteen colonies
who considered themselves “Americans,” as opposed to Virginians, Pennsyl-
vanians, New Yorkers, and so on. Nevertheless, the people who joined under
the Articles of Confederation had much in common. They shared a common
language, ethnic stock, and history as well as a philosophy of government that
stressed individual rights over group rights. Given time and interaction, one
would expect these former colonials to develop a common sense of national
identity.
To a substantial extent, that integration occurred during the nineteenth
century via such common endeavors as the successful wars against the Span-
ish in Florida, against Great Britain in 1812, and against various Indian tribes.
As people moved westward to the frontier, the conquest of the continent itself
also became a unifying national purpose.
Yet a major challenge to the development of this emerging sense of na-
tional identity also arose during the nineteenth century. Between 1830 and
1910, while the country was absorbing new territory, approximately forty-
four million immigrants entered the United States, mostly Europeans with
backgrounds differing from the white Anglo-Saxon prototype of the found-
ers. Moreover, the Civil War resulted in the freeing of millions of African
American slaves, who suddenly became American citizens. There was also a
trickle of immigrants arriving from Asia. Finally, there were Jewish immi-
grants, primarily in the Northeast, and Hispanics, primarily in the Southwest.
The country’s citizenry was becoming multiethnic and multiracial.
Native Americans Adopted in 1789, the U.S. Constitution made Native

Americans wards of the federal government. Treaties with the tribes, like all
treaties, were to be federal affairs, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly af-
firmed the exclusive nature of this power of Congress (Cherokee Nation v. Geor-
gia, 1831; New York Indians v. United States, 1898). The Supreme Court has also
repeatedly upheld the federal government’s right to rescind—by ordinary
legislation or the admission of new states to the union—those rights accorded
the tribes by prior treaties (the Cherokee Tobacco case, 1871; United States v.
Winans, 1905). Even the rationale for the guardian-ward relationship existing
between the federal government and the tribes has been elucidated in the
opinions of the Court. Essentially, it involves three elements: the weakness
and helplessness of Native Americans, the degree to which their condition
can be traced to their prior dealings with the federal government, and the
202
Discrimination
government’s resultant obligation to protect them. Few of the federal poli-

cies adopted before World War II, however, can be described as protective or
even benign toward Native Americans.
Policies toward Native Americans traditionally built on the pattern of rela-
tions with the tribes established by Europeans prior to the ratification of the
Constitution. For hundreds of years, the French, Portuguese, Spanish, En-
glish, and Dutch subdued the tribes they encountered, denigrated their cul-
tures, and confiscated their lands and wealth. Early U.S. actions continued
the pattern, especially where tribes physically hindered western expansion.
During the 1830’s, the concept of Indian Territory (land for the Native Amer-
icans territorially removed from European settlers) gained favor among Eu-
ropean Americans.
When even the most remote of areas were eventually opened to European
immigrants, the Indian Territory policy was abandoned in favor of a reserva-
tion policy: relocating and settling tribes within contained borders. Mean-
while, contact with European diseases, combined with the increasingly harsh
life forced on Native Americans, had devastating effects on the tribes in terms
of disrupting their societies and dramatically reducing their numbers. Begin-
ning during the 1880’s, reservation policies were frequently augmented by
forced assimilation policies: Many young Native Americans were taken from
their reservations and sent to distant boarding schools. There, tribal wear
and ways were ridiculed, and speaking native languages in class could mean
beatings. Only with World War I did these policies soften.
Significant changes in government attitudes toward Native Americans did
not come until the Indian New Deal was instituted by reform-minded com-
missioner of Indian affairs John Collier during the 1930’s. During the late
1960’s, another chapter opened as Indians began to demand their own civil
rights in the wake of the predominantly African American Civil Rights move-
ment. More enlightened federal policies toward Native Americans began to
emerge, and since the 1960’s considerable legislation has appeared, includ-
ing the 1968 American Indian Civil Rights Act and the 1975 Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act. A number of factors have
worked against Native Americans in advancing their own cause, among them
the small number of Native Americans (less than 1 percent of the American
population), the assimilation of their most educated members into the gen-
eral population, and the fact that Native Americans generally think of them-
selves not as “Indians” or “Native Americans” but as members of a specific
tribe.
Discrimination in Immigration Policy Fulfillment of the U.S. self-

determined manifest destiny to spread from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean
required people, and early in the nineteenth century the government opened
its doors wide to immigrants from Europe.
Yet even during this period, the door was open to few beyond Europe. His-
panic immigrants could enter the country fairly easily across its southern bor-
203
Discrimination
Sign on a Parker, Arizona, barbershop near a Japanese relocation center making it clear that per-
sons of Japanese ancestry were not welcome inside. The term “Jap” arose around 1880 as a collo-
quial short form for “Japanese.” It originally carried no negative connotations, but during World
War II, it took on intensely pejorative meanings that now make it highly offensive, especially to Jap-
anese Americans. (National Archives)
der, but American memories of Texas’s war with Mexico made the country
inhospitable toward them. More conspicuously, immigration policy was anti-
Asian by design. The Chinese Exclusion Act, for example, passed in 1882,
prohibited unskilled Chinese laborers from entering the country. Later
amendments made it even more restrictive and forced Chinese people living
in the United States to carry identification papers. The law was not repealed
until 1943. Beginning with the exclusion laws of the 1880’s, quotas, literacy
tests, and ancestry requirements were used individually and in combination
to exclude Asian groups. Indeed, even after the efforts during the 1950’s to
make the immigration process less overtly discriminatory, preferences ac-
corded to the kin of existing citizens continued to skew the system in favor of
European and—to a lesser extent—African immigrants.
Meanwhile, Asians who succeeded in entering the country often became
the targets of such discriminatory state legislation as California’s 1913 Alien
Land Bill, which responded to the influx of Japanese in California by limiting
their right to lease land and denying them the right to leave any land already
owned to the next generation. The most overtly discriminatory act against
Asian immigrants or Asian Americans was perpetrated by the federal govern-
ment, however, which under the color of wartime exigencies relocated tens of
thousands of U.S.-born Japanese Americans living on the West Coast to de-
tention camps during World War II. The Supreme Court upheld the reloca-
tion program in Korematsu v. United States (1944).
204
Discrimination
It was not until the 1960’s and 1970’s, during and following the Vietnam
War and the collapse of a series of United States-supported governments and
revolutionary movements in Asia and Latin America, that the United States
opened its doors to large numbers of immigrants and refugees from Asia and
the Hispanic world. The government went so far as to accord citizenship to
children born of foreigners illegally living in the country.
African Americans Nineteenth century European immigrants generally

were able to make the transition to American citizenship effectively. The ur-
ban political machines found jobs for them and recruited them into the polit-
ical process as voters who, in turn, supported the machines. The prosperity of
the country, manifested in the land rushes of the nineteenth century, the in-
dustrial revolution, and the postwar economic booms of the twentieth cen-
tury, enabled the vast majority of these immigrants to achieve upward mobil-
ity and a share of the good life.
The citizens who were unable to fit into this pattern, apart from the
reservation-bound American Indian tribes, were the African Americans. En-
slaved in thirteen states prior to the Civil War (1861-1865) and kept in subser-
vience by state laws and various extralegal arrangements for generations
afterward, African Americans remained a social, economic, and political
underclass with little expectation of progress until nearly eighty years after
the Civil War Amendments were added to the Constitution to free and em-
power them.
The Thirteenth Amendment (1865) abolished slavery, the Fourteenth
Amendment (1868) was designed to prevent states from interfering with the
rights of former slaves, and the Fifteenth Amendment (1870) constitutionally
enfranchised African Americans. By the end of the nineteenth century, how-
ever, Supreme Court opinions and state action had combined to minimize
the impact of these amendments. In the Slaughterhouse cases (1873), the Su-
preme Court crippled the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court’s decision
limited the amendment’s privileges and immunities clause only to those
rights a citizen has by virtue of national citizenship, not state citizenship. Sec-
ond, it interpreted the due process clause as a restraint only on how a state
may act, not on what it can do. Only the equal protection clause of the Four-
teenth Amendment, which the Court limited to issues of race, continued to
offer protection to the newly freed slaves, and in two subsequent cases even
that protection was substantially reduced.
First, in the Civil Rights cases of 1883, the Supreme Court ruled that the
equal protection clause applies only to state action, not to private discrimi-
nation. Then, in the pivotal case Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Court held
that states could satisfy the requirements of the equal protection clause by
providing “separate-but-equal” facilities for African Americans and whites.
In the meantime, the states began to employ literacy tests, poll taxes, and
other devices and arrangements to restrict the ability of African Americans to
vote.
205
Discrimination
Inclusion Policies Between 1896 and 1936, not only did the separate-but-
equal doctrine legitimize racial discrimination, but also the Supreme Court
persistently sustained separation schemes as long as facilities of some kind
were provided to a state’s black citizens—even if the facilities were woefully
inferior to those provided to the white community. During the mid-1930’s,
however, responding to cases being appealed by the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Supreme Court began to
shift direction. Between 1936 and 1954, it began to demand that states pro-
vide equal facilities to both races and to adopt more demanding tests for mea-
suring the equality of segregated facilities.
A Texas system providing separate law schools for African Americans and
whites, for example, was ruled unconstitutional in 1950 in Sweatt v. Painter be-
cause the black law school lacked the “intangibles” (such as reputation and
successful alumni) that confer “greatness” on a law school and hence was un-
equal to the long-established school of law for white students at the University
of Texas. Likewise, during the same period the Supreme Court began to re-
move some of the state-imposed obstacles to African Americans voting in the
South and to limit the use of state machinery to enforce private acts of dis-
crimination. The separate-but-equal test itself was finally abandoned in 1954,
when, in the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court
ruled that segregated facilities are inherently unequal in public education.
The Brown decision led to a decade-long effort by southern states to avoid
compliance with desegregation orders. With the Supreme Court providing a
moral voice against segregated public facilities, however, these state efforts
failed when challenged in court. Moreover, a powerful multiracial Civil Rights
movement emerged to demand justice for African Americans in other areas
as well. In response, Congress enacted such landmark legislation as the 1964
Civil Rights Act (outlawing discrimination in employment and in places of
private accommodation), the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and a series of affirma-
tive action laws designed to benefit groups traditionally discriminated against
in American society.
As a result of these laws, the profile of the United States as a multiracial so-
ciety was irrevocably altered. This change occurred almost entirely as a result
of action within the country’s legal and constitutional channels. To be sure,
prejudice cannot be legislated away even though discrimination can be made
illegal. During the mid-1990’s, most American cities continued to possess a
large African American underclass even as affirmative action and Head Start
programs were becoming controversial and being canceled. On the other
hand, the policies that had been adopted during the 1950’s and 1960’s en-
abled a sizable African American middle and professional class to develop,
and many American cities had elected African Americans to govern them by
the 1990’s.
It has been argued that the growing prosperity of a subgroup of the African
American community undercut the power of the Civil Rights movement. By
the 1990’s, a number of successful and affluent African American leaders, such
206
Dominican immigrants
as Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, were themselves opposing fur-

ther affirmative action plans as well as further efforts to finance welfare pro-
grams perceived as primarily benefiting a heavily minority urban underclass.
Joseph R. Rudolph, Jr.

McCrea Adams
Further Reading For good short discussions of government policies to-

ward Native Americans, see Edward H. Spicer, The American Indians (Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1980), and Francis
Paul Prucha, Indian Policy in the United States: Historical Essays (Lincoln: Uni-
versity of Nebraska Press, 1981). Immigration and discrimination is well
treated in Nathan Glazer, ed., Clamor at the Gates: The New American Immi-
gration (San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1985); Ronald
Takaki, ed., From Different Shores: Perspectives on Race and Ethnicity in America
(2d ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); and Nathan Glazer and
Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s classic, Beyond the Melting Pot: The Negroes, Puerto Ri-
cans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City (2d ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1970). Interesting works within the vast literature on the Civil Rights
movement include Leon Friedman, The Civil Rights Reader: Basic Documents of
the Civil Rights Movement (New York: Walker, 1968); Anna Kosof, The Civil
Rights Movement and Its Legacy (New York: Watts, 1989); and Dennis Chong,
Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1991). Two books that look at issues of discrimination as they relate to
immigrants are Immigration: A Civil Rights Issue for the Americas (Wilmington,
Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1999), edited by Susanne Jonas and Suzanne Dod
Thomas, and Donna R. Gabaccia’s Immigration and American Diversity: A Social
and Cultural History (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2002).
See also Accent discrimination; Arab American stereotypes; Asian Ameri-

can Legal Defense Fund; Celtic Irish; Chinese Exclusion Act; Coolies; Immi-
gration Act of 1990; Irish immigrants and African Americans; Irish immi-
grants and discrimination; Irish stereotypes; Lau v. Nichols; League of United
Latin American Citizens; Mexican American Legal Defense and Education
Fund; Nativism; Naturalization; Plyler v. Doe; Soviet Jewish immigrants.
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Caribbean island
nation of the Dominican Republic
Immigration issues: Demographics; Latino immigrants; West Indian immi-

grants
207
Significance: Although the Caribbean’s Dominican Republic has a compar-

atively tiny population, its emigrants make up one of the fastest-growing
immigrant populations in the United States.
Situated between Cuba and Puerto Rico in the Caribbean Sea, the Dominican
Republic shares the island of Hispaniola with its neighbor Haiti. The country
is known primarily for its warm tropical climate, its sugarcane and tobacco ex-
ports, and its contributions to the international community in the person-
ages of fashion designer Oscar de la Renta, musician Juan Luis Guerra, and
major league baseball players such as Sammy Sosa, Juan Marichal, George
Bell, and Pedro Guerrero.
According to U.S. Census figures, 915,274 Dominicans entered the United
States between 1820 and 2003. During the 1990’s, they arrived at an average
rate of 33,500 immigrants per year. During the first three years of the twenty-
first century, that rate dropped significantly, to about 23,300 immigrants per
year. Dominican immigrants are especially evident in New York City, where
they ranked as the most populous immigrant group during the mid-1990’s.
Their significant presence in that city has led to the emergence of a Domini-
can American community.
During the early 1960’s, after the assassination of Dominican dictator
Rafael Léonidas Trujillo, the Dominican Republic was affected by political
and economic turmoil. The ensuing unrest resulted in the outbreak of civil
war on April 25, 1965, which led to a U.S. military occupation of the country
in an effort to protect American economic interests. Following the U.S. inter-
vention, many political activists were granted visas to the United States in an
effort to stem political dissent against the new U.S.-sponsored right-wing gov-
ernment of Dominican president Joaquín Balaguer. This marked the begin-
ning of a continued pattern of Dominican emigration to North America that
was fueled by political as well as economic reasons.
Following a brief period of industrial growth under the new leadership of
President Balaguer, Dominicans saw their country’s economy worsen. The
middle class all but disappeared in the wake of escalating oil prices, a massive
foreign debt, and a decline in exports that resulted in a 23 percent unemploy-
ment rate during the early 1990’s. This factor, coupled with the increased sen-
timents of frustration by Dominicans toward the leadership of the country,
led to a Dominican diaspora in search of a place in which to obtain political
and economic freedom. Like other immigrant groups in the United States,
Dominicans have tended to settle in only a few states. According to the 1990
U.S. Census, 70 percent of all Dominicans in the nation resided in New York,
followed by New Jersey with 11 percent, Florida with 7 percent, and Massa-
chusetts with 5 percent.
A New Community The Dominican American community is made up of

people who have obtained U.S. citizenship after their arrival to North Amer-
ica as well as those that are born in the United States of Dominican parents.
208
So salient is the Dominican migratory pattern to the New York City area that it
has earned Dominican Americans the nickname of Dominicanyorks. Mass
migration into New York City has resulted in the “Dominicanization” of neigh-
borhoods such as Washington Heights. However, Dominican Americans have
found some challenges in adapting to their new environment. Some resis-
tance from the established residents, as well as political challenges in their lo-
cal community, has led many Dominican Americans to become more actively
involved in the political and economic activities of their community.
Part of the acculturation of Dominican Americans into mainstream society
has been brought about through active participation in their neighborhood
schools. During the early 1980’s, a campaign was mounted to gain greater
control over the schools in Washington Heights in order to make them more
responsive to the needs of the local community. In 1980, the Community As-
sociation of Progressive Dominicans confronted the school board to demand
bilingual education for newly arrived immigrants. Their presence in the po-
litical arena was also established in 1991 with the election of Guillermo
Linares, the first Dominican ever to sit on the New York City Council. How-
ever, as is often the case with newly arrived immigrant groups to the United
States, the moderate success of Dominican Americans has been considered
by some as a challenge to the established residents of Washington Heights
(mainly Jews, Puerto Ricans, and African Americans).
Dominican immigrants in New York City protesting the U.S . occupation of their homeland in early
1965. (National Archives)
209
Ethnic Relations As Steven Lowenstein explains in his 1989 work titled

Frankfort on the Hudson: The German-Jewish Community of Washington Heights,
1933-1983, the move by Dominican Americans to gain greater control over
the local schools came at the expense of the established Jewish population in
that area. Some see this as a source of tension between the two groups. One
Jewish leader is quoted as saying:
In order to save our own congregation, we have to live with our neighbors, even
if they are different from us, even if we don’t like them. But we cannot help it.
We have to live with the Blacks, with the Spanish.
During the initial migration years, Dominicans rented apartments in the

mostly Jewish-owned tenements; however, as the years progressed, the Jewish
population became increasingly sparse in the Washington Heights area.
The newly arrived Dominican immigrants found acceptance within the
Puerto Rican community during the early 1960’s. Many Dominican immi-
grants were able to find housing and employment through friendships with
Puerto Ricans. Some argue that the preexisting presence of the Puerto Rican
community was helpful to the newly arrived Dominicans in that it led both
Jewish and African Americans to come to terms with the unavoidable reality
of a Latin American presence in New York City. However, as more and more
Dominicans began migrating to the area, tensions arose within the Puerto Ri-
can community. The growing sentiment was that Dominican Americans were
accepting low-wage jobs and undercutting the Puerto Ricans in the job mar-
ket. Likewise, as the Dominican population grew, many Dominican Ameri-
cans began to feel that the Puerto Rican agenda followed by most of the
Latino community leaders was not representative of the ever-growing Domin-
ican population.
Similarly, African Americans have found themselves in competition with
Dominican Americans for jobs and housing. Some African American busi-
ness owners have complained about the aggressive tactics of some of the Do-
minican business owners. According to Linda Chavez’s study titled Out of the
Barrio: Toward a New Politics of Hispanic Assimilation (1991), Dominicans own
70 percent of all Hispanic small businesses in New York. Although sociable re-
lations between these two groups continue, they tend to reside in partially
segregated neighborhoods, perhaps because of racial and ethnic preconcep-
tions held by both groups. Not unlike their African American neighbors,
Dominican Americans have also been subject to racial discrimination based
on physical appearance. As Patricia Pessar pointed out in her 1995 book A
Visa for a Dream, often Dominicans who are perceived as “white” by Anglo-
Americans are treated better and offered better jobs than Dominicans who
are dark-skinned.
The mixture of races found among Dominicans has frequently led to many
dark-skinned Dominican Americans being misidentified as African Ameri-
cans and subsequently being subjected to the same kind of racism experi-
210
enced by African Americans. In Sakinah Carter’s 1994 work titled Shades of

Identity: Puerto Ricans and Dominicans Across Paradigms, a twenty-two-year-old
Dominican is quoted as saying:
All we see on television when we arrive is how bad blacks are, so we cling to our
difference, our Latino-ness, in order to say we are not those blacks that you hear
about in the streets or see on the news. We aren’t bad. But at the same time, it
feels ridiculous not to embrace our blackness because many dark Dominicans
do live as other blacks, treated as blacks by white people, and other Latinos who
act like there is one Latino phenotype, like there’s a way to look Latino. . . . I’m
black and Latino, a black Latino—we exist, you know.
However, dating back to the initial wave of Dominican immigrants during

the 1960’s, and in spite of some social challenges, Dominicans, Puerto Ri-
cans, Jews, and African Americans have all been able to coexist as productive
members of their communities despite their cultural differences and racial
preconceptions.
Pedro R. Payne
Further Reading For a thorough study of the history of the Dominican
Republic, see Frank Moya Pons’s The Dominican Republic: A National History
(New Rochelle, N.Y.: Hispaniola Books, 1995). Luis E. Guarnizo writes a
chapter on “Dominicanyorks” in Challenging Fronteras, edited by Mary Ro-
mero, Pierrette Hondagneu-Sotelo, and Vilma Ortiz (New York: Routledge,
1997), which explores the “binational interconnection” that has resulted
from Dominican immigration into the United States. Another good source
for issues pertaining to Dominican migration and adaptation to American so-
ciety is Ramona Hernandez and Silvio Torres-Saillant’s chapter in Latinos in
New York, edited by Gabriel Haslip-Viera and Sherrie L. Baver (Notre Dame,
Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1996). Patricia Pessar, in A Visa for a
Dream (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1995), manages to capture the Dominican im-
migrant experience as well as the cultural factors that affect Dominican accul-
turation into American society. For a historical account of the African and Eu-
ropean ancestry of Dominicans and other Latin Americans, see Afro-Latin
Americans Today: No Longer Invisible (London: Minority Rights Group, 1995).
Works that discuss Dominican immigrants in the broader context of West In-
dian immigration include Melonie P. Heron’s The Occupational Attainment of
Caribbean Immigrants in the United States, Canada, and England (New York: LFB
Scholarly Publications, 2001) and Milton Vickerman’s Crosscurrents: West In-
dian Immigrants and Race (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). Immigra-
tion Research for a New Century: Multidisciplinary Perspectives (New York: Russell
Sage Foundation, 2000), edited by Nancy Foner, Rubén G. Rumbaut, and Ste-
ven J. Gold, is a collection of papers on immigration from a conference held
in 1998 that includes a chapter on Dominican immigrants.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Haitian immigrants; Immigration
“crisis”; Latinos; Latinos and family customs; West Indian immigrants.
211
Eastern European Jewish immigrants
Eastern European Jewish

immigrants
Identification: Jewish immigrants to North America from eastern Euro-
pean nations
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Religion
Significance: Among Jewish immigrants to North America, eastern Europe-

ans were relative latecomers and were not well received by either Christian
Americans or other Jewish Americans.
The major emigration of eastern European Jews to the United States did not
begin until the 1880’s. Jews began to emigrate when the services they per-
formed as small-scale merchants and artisans were rendered obsolete by the
modernization of agriculture and the early impact of industrialization on the
peasant economy of Russia, Austria-Hungary, and the Polish territory held by
Germany. The migration became a mass movement, however, when deadly
state-sponsored riots left hundreds dead and thousands homeless in Russia
and Russian Poland following the assassination of Czar Alexander II in 1881.
About 250,000 Jews lived in the United States in 1880; by 1920, more than
Eastern European immigrants crossing the Atlantic in 1899. (Library of Congress)
212
Eastern European Jewish immigrants
2 million eastern European Jews had

joined them.
They were not given a warm wel-
come. The American Jewish commu-
nity reacted with alarm, fearful that the
upsurge in immigration would stimu-
late anti-Semitism and undermine the
relatively comfortable position that Jews
had attained in the country. Only as
the magnitude of the problem became
clear did the established Jewish com-
munity begin to organize an array of
philanthropic institutions and establish
defense organizations to combat anti-
Semitism. The migration’s size and the
tendency of the new arrivals to cluster
within the nation’s largest cities, espe-
cially New York, made them particularly
conspicuous. Crowded into slum areas
where they transformed whole neigh-
borhoods into regions where no English
could be heard, they seemed particu-
larly threatening to native-born Ameri-
cans.
Many of the men, possessing few skills
valuable to an industrial economy, be-
came peddlers pushing carts or carry-
ing packs filled with merchandise until
they accumulated enough cash to open
small retail stores. Many of the women
and a significant proportion of the men
One of the best-known Jewish immigrants in
found work in the garment industry. A U.S . history was the magician and escape
few had previous experience in the nee- artist Harry Houdini. The son of a Hungarian
dle trades, but of more importance was rabbi, he was born Erik Weisz in Budapest in
the willingness of owners to hire them. 1874 and came to the United States with his
Manufacturing ready-to-wear clothing family as a boy. (Library of Congress)
was a relatively new and risky industry
that attracted Jewish entrepreneurs who were open to hiring and training
Jewish workers.
Eastern European Jews settled in dense concentrations in their own neigh-
borhoods and rarely interacted with other ethnic groups. Those whom they
displaced, especially the New York City Irish, often responded with small-
scale street violence. In addition, the Jewish community experienced sharp
internal divisions. Jews from a given area of Europe tended to settle near each
other, build separate synagogues, and create self-help and burial societies de-
213
English-only and official English movements
signed to serve migrants from the specific city or region from which they had
come. A hierarchy of prejudice separated Jewish groups and influenced the
choice of marriage partners. German Jews looked down on Polish and Rus-
sian Jews. Russian Jews were reputed to view marriage with Galician Jews, who
came from the most poverty-stricken region of the Austro-Hungarian Em-
pire, as equivalent to marrying a Gentile, which was taboo.
Economic success increased the interaction of the eastern European Jews
with the larger American society. In the affluent post-World War II years, they
moved into the suburbs. Their children, fluent in English and increasingly
college-educated, entered the professions as teachers, doctors, and lawyers.
As the descendants of the eastern European Jews merged with the American
middle class, relations with other ethnic and religious groups became easier
and less antagonistic.
Milton Berman
Further Reading
ica, 1984.
nois Press, 1986.
Greene, Victor R. A Singing Ambivalence: American Immigrants Between Old World
and New, 1830-1930. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 2004.
Howe, Irving. World of Our Fathers. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.
Sanders, Ronald. Shores of Refuge: A Hundred Years of Jewish Immigration. New
York: Schocken Books, 1988.
See also American Jewish Committee; Ashkenazic and German Jewish im-
migrants; Israeli immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Jewish settlement of New
York; Jews and Arab Americans; Sephardic Jews; Soviet Jewish immigrants.
English-only and official

English movements
Definition: Attempts by federal and state governments, lobbyists, organiza-
tions, or private citizens to make English the “only” or “official” language
in the United States
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Discrimination; Language;

Nativism and racism
214
Significance: Although some Americans see English-only movements as pa-

triotic or well-intended, others regard such efforts as anti-immigrant or
racist.
Determining how many Americans cannot or do not use English for everyday
activities is very difficult. According to the 1996 Statistical Abstract of the United
States, more than thirty-two million Americans, or more than 13 percent of
the population, speak a language other than English at home. Of these,
around 44 percent, or about fourteen million people, do not speak English
“very well.” Figures such as these are cited by many Americans as evidence of
national unity eroding under a wave of linguistic diversity and cultural strife.
During the 1980’s, organizations such as U.S. English began pressing for
state, local, and federal legislation to make English the only official language
in various parts of the country. Several attempts have been made to pass a U.S.
constitutional amendment mandating English as an official national lan-
guage, but they have all failed. However, eighteen states have passed some
form of official English legislation. In response to these activities, other orga-
nizations, such as English Plus, have worked to maintain linguistic and cul-
tural pluralism in the United States. Four states have passed some kind of
mandate supporting such sanctions.
Historical Precedents Although two-thirds of Americans believed that

English already was the official language of the United States during the
Immigrants in an English-language class being conducted in a Ford Motor Company plant in De-
troit during the early twentieth century. (Library of Congress)
215
1990’s, the Founders did not establish an official language, perhaps because
they felt no need to address the issue. Although the United States has always
had a large number of non-English speakers on its soil, English has been the
dominant language in the land since the first settlements in the original thir-
teen colonies. In 1790 after the Revolutionary War—when the nation was per-
haps at its height of linguistic diversity—the population was still 76 percent
English-speaking, apart from many slaves.
The second most commonly spoken language in the new nation was Ger-
man, spoken in states such as Pennsylvania, originally a bilingual English and
German state. However, by 1815, the German speakers had largely merged
linguistically and culturally with the English-speaking majority. English be-
came the de facto national language.
Although some of the nation’s leaders occasionally complained about
non-English speakers (for example, Theodore Roosevelt once said that Ameri-
cans should not be “dwellers in a polyglot boarding house”), and the issue was
occasionally raised, the official language debate did not receive much thought
until the mid-1980’s. The debate reached the national level in 1986 when Cal-
ifornia’s Proposition 63, which made English the official state language,
passed with 73 percent of the vote.
The Debate Those who argue for an official language policy say that to live
successful and fruitful lives in the United States, immigrants and non-English
speakers must learn English: Without fluency in English, they will forever re-
main in a linguistic underclass, economically and educationally deprived.
They believe that bilingual education and multilingual voting ballots and
driver’s license exams serve only to foster and perpetuate these people’s de-
pendence on other languages. They say that the situations in pluralistic coun-
tries such as Canada, India, or Belgium, where linguistic wars have been
fought, demonstrate the need for a single language to unify the country.
English-only supporters cite statistics showing that immigrants want to learn
English and argue that, therefore, their efforts are not anti-immigrant.
Probably the most organized and outspoken English-only group is U.S. En-
glish, which was established in 1983 and by the year 2005 claimed a member-
ship of 1.8 million. The original board of directors and advisers included
many well-known and respected individuals, including Nobel Prize-winning
author Saul Bellow, social critics Alistair Cooke and Jacques Barzun, former
university president and senator S. I. Hayakawa, actor and California gover-
nor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and newscaster Walter Cronkite (who resigned
in 1988).
The organization has argued that English is the common bond that unites
all Americans and that the United States shoud take active steps to avoid lan-
guage segregation to avert some of the bitter linguistic conflicts that have
plagued many pluralistic nations. They advocate adopting a constitutional
amendment establishing English as the official language in the United States,
restricting or eliminating bilingual education programs, requiring English
216
State Language Policies

State Year Action
States Where English Has Become the “Official” Language

Alabama 1990 by constitutional amendment
Arizona 1988 by constitutional amendment
Arkansas 1987 by legislative statute
California 1986 by constitutional amendment
Colorado 1988 by constitutional amendment
Florida 1988 by constitutional amendment
Georgia 1986 by legislative statute
Hawaii 1978 by constitutional amendment
Illinois 1969 by legislative statute
Indiana 1984 by legislative statute
Kentucky 1984 by legislative statute
Mississippi 1987 by legislative statute
Nebraska 1920 by constitutional amendment
North Carolina 1987 by legislative statute
North Dakota 1987 by legislative statute
South Carolina 1987 by legislative statute
Tennessee 1984 by legislative statute
Virginia 1981 by legislative statute
States Supporting “English Plus,” Official Linguistic Pluralism
New Mexico 1989 by legislative resolution
Oregon 1989 by legislative resolution
Rhode Island 1992 by legislative statute
Washington 1989 by legislative resolution
Other Policies
All U.S. states 1990 Native American Language Act gives
American Indian languages special
rights and status.
Arizona 1999 Grade 1 through 8 foreign-language
instruction is mandated by statute.
competency for all new citizens, and expanding opportunities for learning
English.
The storm over official English surprised many people when Senator Ha-
yakawa, a Republican from California, during the early 1980’s introduced a
constitutional amendment to make English the official language. The amend-
ment also would have eliminated many foreign-language supplementary ma-
terials in both the public and private sector and, therefore, appeared to be
aimed at ending bilingual education. Many people perceived the English-
217
only movement as an attempt to disfranchise immigrants or nonnative En-

glish speakers by depriving them of access to basic social services and educa-
tion. Many people felt that the amendment would only splinter the country
into even more divisive interest and ethnic groups and foster xenophobia and
intolerance.
English Plus One of the groups that formed to combat English-only ini-
tiatives was English Plus, established in 1987. The group is a coalition of more
than fifty prestigious educational and civil rights organizations, including the
American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Applied Linguistics, and the
National Council of Teachers of English. The organization’s stated goals are
to strengthen the vitality of the United States through linguistic and cultural
pluralism.
English Plus recognizes that English is, and should be, the primary lan-
guage of the United States; however, the group argues that the equal protec-
tion clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that language assistance be made
available to all who require it in order for them to enjoy equal access to essen-
tial public services, education, and the political process. Their efforts include
advocating the acquisition of multiple language skills to foster better foreign
relations and U.S. competitiveness in the global economy, encouraging peo-
ple to retain their first language, working to develop and maintain language
assistance programs such as bilingual education in elementary and high
schools, and launching campaigns against legislative initiatives or actions that
would make English the official language.
The Future Many Americans feel threatened by rising immigration and

changing demographics. Others see little reason to oppose English-only or
official-English amendments or statutes since English is so necessary to life in
the United States. Some Americans, however, believe that these amendments
and statutes are really a form of racism. These people ask why proponents of
English-only want to pass a law to enforce what is already in effect, unless they
have a hidden agenda. However, regardless of what legislators or voters do,
American identity, culture, and intellectual achievement will continue to be
influenced by immigrants, who no doubt will be making their contributions
in English.
James Stanlaw
Further Reading Fernando de la Peña’s Democracy or Babel: The Case for Of-
ficial English (Washington, D.C.: U.S. English, 1991) makes the argument that
English should be the official language in the United States. S. I. Hayakawa,
the most influential spokesperson for the English-only movement, argues for
amending the U.S. Constitution in The English Language Amendment: One Na-
tion . . . Indivisible? (Washington, D.C.: Washington Institute for Values in Pub-
lic Policy, 1985) and states his case in “Why English Should Be Our Official
Language” in The Educational Digest (52, 1987). Arguments against official En-
218
Ethnic enclaves
glish are found in Not Only English: Affirming America’s Multilingual Heritage,
edited by Harvey Daniels (Urbana, Ill.: National Council of Teachers of En-
glish, 1990), and Official English/English Only: More Than Meets the Eye (Wash-
ington, D.C.: National Education Association of the United States, 1988). Bill
Piatt’s ¿Only English? Law and Language Policy in the United States (Albuquer-
que: University of New Mexico Press, 1990) discusses the legal downsides to
making English the national language. Political scientist Raymond Tatalo-
vich’s Nativism Reborn? The Official English Language Movement and the American
States (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1995) examines the state leg-
islatures and legislators who passed English-only measures and suggests that
such sentiment is closely tied to anti-immigration politics. English: Our Official
Language?, edited by Bee Gallegos (New York: H. W. Wilson, 1994), and Lan-
guage Loyalties: A Source Book on the Official English Controversy, edited by James
Crawford (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), present articles on
the English-only controversy that appeared in the popular media and schol-
arly journals. Other works offering broader perspective on language include
Language and Cultural Diversity in U.S. Schools: Democratic Principles in Action
(Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2005), edited by Terry A. Osborn; Portraits of Liter-
acy Across Families, Communities, and Schools: Intersections and Tensions (Mah-
wah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates, 2005), edited by Jim Anderson and others;
Charmian Kenner’s Becoming Biliterate: Young Children Learning Different Writ-
ing Systems (Sterling, Va.: Trentham Books, 2004); and Terrence G. Wiley’s
Literacy and Language Diversity in the United States (2d ed. Washington, D.C.:
Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005).
See also Accent discrimination; Anglo-conformity; Bilingual education;

Bilingual Education Act of 1968; British as dominant group; Generational ac-
culturation; Hansen effect; Lau v. Nichols; Proposition 227.
Ethnic enclaves
Definition: Isolated ethnic communities, free from contact from the major-
ity population, that are usually intended to maintain customs and tradi-
tions that are under attack by outsiders
Immigration issues: Discrimination; Ethnic enclaves
Significance: Ethnic enclaves—such as Chinatowns, Little Tokyos, and

Koreatowns—are usually created by groups that feel oppressed or discrimi-
nated against by outside forces.
Ethnic enclaves are territories inhabited by a distinct group of people who

are separated from the dominant population by differences in language, reli-
219
Ethnic enclaves
gion, social class, or culture and who are frequently subjected to prejudice
and discrimination. An ethnic group has a shared history based on a sense of
difference from others resulting from several factors, including a unique set
of experiences (such as being enslaved or defeated in a war), skin color or
other physical differences (such as height), or geography.
Reasons for Formation Enclaves are established for two major reasons.
Some are found in nations and among groups where a distinct sense of injus-
tice exists between peoples. This sense of discrimination prevents communi-
cation and results in isolation and a sense of inferiority within the minority
group. The dominant group persecutes persons deemed inferior who then
withdraw into isolated communities to protect themselves from attack. En-
claves can also be built because of a sense of ethnic superiority, or ethnocen-
trism. In this case, one group sees itself as being far superior to any others and
deliberately separates itself from the rest of society. This self-imposed isola-
tion results from the view that the way of life being lived by group members
should not be contaminated by “inferior” outsiders.
Ethnic enclaves result from the failure of groups to accommodate, accul-
turate, or assimilate. Accommodation is a reduction of conflict among groups
as they find ways of living with one another based on mutual respect for differ-
ences. Groups maintain their differences but agree to live with one another.
In places where enclaves develop, only physical separation lessens conflict:
Vietnamese American community center in the Little Saigon district of Garden Grove, California,
which has one of the largest concentration of Asian immigrants in the United States. (David Fowler)
220
Ethnic enclaves
Groups continue to hate and discredit one another but geography keeps
them apart.
Acculturation, meaning taking over some of the attitudes and beliefs of
the other group, fails to take place in these situations because contact be-
tween different peoples is rare, and they stick to their traditional values. In-
stead of becoming more alike, as would be true under the process of assimila-
tion, the groups become more and more different. A common culture fails to
develop, and frequently misunderstandings and miscommunication can lead
to violent conflicts. It is as if each group lives in a different world, with memo-
ries, sentiments, feelings, and attitudes that are totally unknown to the other.
The more divergent peoples are or become, the more difficult assimilation
will be. This situation is evident among the peoples of southeastern Europe,
especially in areas of the former Yugoslavia, such as Bosnia, Croatia, and Ser-
bia. It is also true in African states such as Burundi, Nigeria, and South Africa.
In a few situations, enclaves develop as a defense against attacks by physi-
cally or numerically superior outsiders. If the group does not retreat and sep-
arate from the dominant society, it will be annihilated. In this case, cutting off
the community from contact with others serves the function of preserving
traditions, customs, and beliefs. Most often, this is done by withdrawing into
the wilderness beyond the reach of the persecutors. In the United States dur-
ing the 1840’s, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
(Mormons) adopted this strategy to save themselves from mob attacks in the
East. Brigham Young, the successor to the group’s founder Joseph Smith, de-
liberately chose to settle his people by the Great Salt Lake, then part of Mex-
ico, because it seemed far enough away from the United States that no one
would bother them. The Mormons lived in this isolated area free from con-
tact with others well into the 1880’s and preserved their distinct religious be-
liefs.
Development of the Concept The concept of ethnic identity and ethnic

enclaves developed in the nineteenth century, though different words and
phrases such as “immigrant group,” “foreign stock,” and “race” were used in
place of “ethnic.” The term “ethnic” was first used by social scientists during
the 1920’s to differentiate the supposedly less fervent attachments based on
language and history in comparison to the supposedly more fundamental bi-
ological attachments based on racial inheritance. Many social scientists were
interested in the question of how people of different linguistic and historical
traditions would become part of modern, specifically American, society. Rob-
ert Ezra Park of the University of Chicago developed a theory of intergroup
relations based on an inevitable process of contact, competition, accommo-
dation, and, finally, full assimilation. As group members moved upward in the
American class system, they would gradually lose their ethnic attachments
and ultimately be accepted as true citizens.
The more different groups were from the white, Anglo-Saxon, majority,
however, the longer and more difficult the process would be (as in the case of
221
Euro-Americans
American Indians and African Americans). Gunnar Myrdal, the great Swed-
ish sociologist, supported this view in his classic An American Dilemma (1944),
a study of race relations in the United States. Park’s analysis of assimilation
has been mostly accepted by sociologists, though Milton Gordon, in Assimila-
tion in American Life (1964), pointed out that assimilation takes much longer
than has been assumed and is frequently marred by conflict and disorder.
Most sociologists and historians writing on the subject since then have agreed
with Gordon and have detailed the difficulties experienced by various Ameri-
can ethnic groups. Most observers have agreed that retreating into enclaves is
sometimes necessary for group survival but always makes cooperation be-
tween groups more difficult.
Further Reading Broad studies of ethnic enclaves in American cities in-

clude Susan K. Wierzbicki’s Beyond the Immigrant Enclave: Network Change and
Assimilation (New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2004), Michel S. La-
guerre’s The Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manilatown in Ameri-
can Society (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999), and Stephanie Bohon’s Lati-
nos in Ethnic Enclaves: Immigrant Workers and the Competition for Jobs (New York:
Garland, 2000). Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s Beyond the
Melting Pot: The Negroes, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City
(Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1963) is a classic study of the long-term persis-
tence of ethnic identities in the United States. Milton M. Gordon’s Assimila-
tion in American Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964) outlines the
factors involved in the process of assimilation. Martin N. Marger’s Race and
Ethnic Relations: American and Global Perspectives (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth
Press, 1985) surveys ethnic problems from a worldwide perspective.
See also Chinatowns; Little Havana; Little Italies; Little Tokyos; Machine
politics.
Euro-Americans
Identification: Also known as European Americans, a panethnic identity
that encompasses all Americans of European ancestry, ranging from de-
scendants of the earliest colonizers to recent immigrants
Immigration issue: European immigrants
Significance: “Euro-American” is a problematic group label in that it is less

widely used than other panethnic identities.
222
Euro-Americans
German American farmers in Nebraska during the mid-twentieth century. (Library of Congress)
In Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America (1990), Richard Alba ob-
served that the emergence of a Euro-American group has been shaped by the
decline of individual European ethnic affiliations, the creation of a common
historical narrative of immigration, struggle, and mobility, and the increasing
Euro-American reaction to political challenges from peoples of color and
post-1965 immigrants.
As a group label, “Euro-American” is less widely used than other panethnic
identities, such as Asian American, Hispanic, and Native American. Domi-
nant identities tend to be “hidden” in intergroup interactions, and the lack of
awareness or use of the Euro-American label reflects the dominant status of
the group in the United States. This process is compounded by the existence
of competing labels for Euro-Americans: “white,” “Caucasian,” and Anglo-
American—the latter term reflecting the historical dominance of British
Americans within the group. The future role of Euro-American group iden-
tity will be determined by both the political and social strategies of the group
itself, and the external and structural forces that mold all panethnic identi-
ties.
Ashley W. Doane, Jr.
Further Reading
Alba, Richard D. Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America. New Ha-
ven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1990.
223
European immigrant literature
See also European immigrant literature; European immigrants, 1790-

1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; Generational acculturation; Ger-
man and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; German immigrants; Gypsy immi-
grants; Irish immigrants; Italian immigrants; Melting pot; Nativism; Polish
immigrants; Scandinavian immigrants; White ethnics.
European immigrant
literature
Definition: Fiction, essays, and other works written by immigrants of Euro-
pean ancestry
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Literature; Nativism and racism
Significance: The literaure produced by European American writers has, to

a great extent, reflected the struggles of assimilation, the loss of identity in
that process, and the pain of being torn between different cultures.
As part of the graduation ceremonies at the Ford Motor Company English

school in Detroit during World War I, students climbed to the stage wearing
the native dress of their European homelands, carrying signs that read Greece,
Syria, Italy, and so on. They then entered a giant cardboard cauldron labeled
“Melting Pot” and emerged dressed in coats and ties and carrying their diplo-
mas and small American flags. Assimilation was dramatically complete.
This stage show is symbolic of a much larger (and usually more subtle) pro-
cess that millions of immigrants to the United States in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries underwent. Between 1820 and 1990, more than fifty mil-
lion immigrants entered the United States, and three-quarters of them came
from Europe. Before 1890, the majority of these immigrants were—in de-
scending numbers—German, Irish, and English. Between 1890 and 1914 fif-
teen million Europeans arrived in the United States, and most of them came
from southern and eastern Europe: Greece, Italy, Hungary, Poland, and Rus-
sia. By 1980, individuals of European origin composed the bulk of the United
States population (approximately 75 percent) and Europeans continued to
immigrate to the United States in large numbers.
224
The Statue of Liberty

Poet Emma Lazarus wrote this sonnet in 1883 in support of the fund orga-
nized to raise money to build the pedestal on which the Statue of Liberty was
placed three years later. The sonnet now appears on a bronze plaque at the base
of the statue. In 1972, the American Museum of Immigration was opened inside
the base of the statue.
The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Demographics In the 1980 U.S. Census, 50 million Americans reported

their ancestry as English, 49 million listed German, and 40 million cited Irish.
African Americans numbered 21 million, French 13 million, Italian 12 mil-
lion, Scottish 10 million, Polish 8 million, Mexican 8 million, American In-
dian 7 million, and Dutch 6 million.
Such distinctive and overwhelming national identification has often been
blurred in American cultural consciousness by the peculiar assimilative pro-
cess of the United States. Economic and social discrimination, on one hand,
pushed immigrants into early and often involuntary assimilation. The dedica-
tion of the Statue of Liberty in 1886—where the Jewish American poet Emma
Lazarus’s words “Give me . . . your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”
are inscribed—was not unanimously endorsed. In the press and on the streets
there were attacks on immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. When
not changed by officials at the government’s Ellis Island reception center, the
names of many European immigrants often quickly were changed by the im-
migrants themselves, who as foreigners were greeted with hostility and suspi-
cion but who as Americans were welcome. The Polish name Sciborski might
become Smith; the Italian name Pina, Pine; the Jewish name Greenberg, sim-
ply Green.
European Americans during the late nineteenth century were drawn by
the lure of the American Dream, which promised equal access to wealth and
225
possibility to all. Supporting this dream was the dominant ideological con-
struct of the melting pot, which, like the symbolic cauldron in the Ford Motor
Company graduation ceremonies, encouraged immigrants to give up their
native heritage and take on a narrower American identity. Behind the melt-
ing pot theory was the belief in homogeneity over heterogeneity, assimilation
over pluralism. The term itself was first popularized in a play, The Melting-Pot,
by the English Jewish writer Israel Zangwill in 1908. As Werner Sollors noted
in Beyond Ethnicity: Consent and Descent in American Culture (1986):
More than any social or political theory, the rhetoric of Zangwill’s play shaped
American discourse on immigration and ethnicity, including most notably the
language of self-declared opponents of the melting-pot concept.
Opponents of immigration have a long history in the United States, and

the objects of their attacks have kept changing. The first nativist expression
was an anti-Catholic sentiment, aimed mainly at the millions of Irish who im-
migrated after 1820. By the end of the nineteenth century, xenophobic feel-
ings had shifted and were aimed at Slavic, Italian, Greek, and other eastern
and southern European immigrants. The height of nativist opposition to im-
migration came during World War I. The literacy test of 1917 marked the be-
ginning of the end of the open-door immigration policy of the United States.
Legislation during the 1920’s closed the door.
Assimilation vs. Ethnic Identity The process of assimilation during the

nineteenth and twentieth centuries had a profound effect not only on Euro-
pean American identity but also on the literature and culture that different
European American ethnic groups produced. In many cases forced by dis-
crimination, loss of language, loss or change of name, and the ideological im-
petus of Americanization to give up ethnic roots, many European Americans
ended up torn between American and European ethnic identities. If the
members of an ethnic culture did not assimilate, they faced the danger of be-
coming ghettoized, forced into an almost secretive, subcultural status.
Writers in the twentieth century, in common with the cultures they repre-
sented, were often afraid to exhibit their ethnic identity. As late as 1969, when
Mario Puzo published The Godfather, for example, critics within the Italian
American community argued that the work would only confirm the worst ste-
reotypes of Italians in the United States. In another novel of the same year,
Philip Roth was condemned by Jewish community leaders for his characters
in Portnoy’s Complaint. Ethnic writers were hindered by their own ethnic com-
munities from revealing too much, which made it easier for them to make the
sometimes Faustian bargain with the dominant culture to trade their ethnic
consciousness for entrance into the literary mainstream.
The dominant culture of the earlier twentieth century was clearly white,
Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant, and the ideology of the melting pot reinforced
the dominant culture’s hold on the popular mind. All writers should be Ameri-
226
can, this theory held, and ethnic cultural and literary artifacts were exotic
and suspect. One perhaps could go folk-dancing as a cultural curiosity, but
European American ethnic identification was discouraged on a number of
ideological and institutional levels.
The dominant literature and literary culture were Anglo; students in dif-
ferent parts of the country all read the most famous works that had been writ-
ten in England and New England, but they had little knowledge of works in
other languages—including their native languages. High school students
from New York City to rural New Mexico, from Seattle to Maine, might know
the nineteenth century English novelist George Eliot’s Silas Marner: The
Weaver of Raveloe (1861) by the time they finished high school but nothing of
their own ethnic literary heritage. Sociological theory supported the notion
that ethnic identification was an insignificant factor in success in American
life.
During the 1960’s, however, this cultural history changed. Nathan Glazer
and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, in Beyond the Melting Pot: The Negroes, Puerto Ri-
cans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City (1963), as James A. Banks has writ-
ten in Teaching Strategies for Ethnic Studies (1991),
presented one of the first theoretical arguments that the melting pot concep-
tion . . . was inaccurate and incomplete. They argued that ethnicity in New York
was important and that it would continue to be important for both politics and
culture.
Similarly, Michael Novak’s The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics: Politics and Cul-
ture in the 1970’s (1971) helped to fuel the growth of the “new ethnicity” and
the new ethnic consciousness during the 1970’s, a consciousness that used
not the melting pot metaphor but rather metaphors of a patchwork quilt, a
salad bowl, or a kaleidoscope to explain the pluralistic nature of ethnicity in
the United States. This theoretical underpinning worked to support the mas-
sive search that members of many ethnic groups were making for their his-
tory. Alex Haley’s Roots: The Saga of an American Family (1976), which traces
his ancestors back to Africa (and which became a popular television mini-
series), helped to encourage similar rediscoveries in other ethnicities—and
not only in those which had experienced the most recent discrimination (Af-
rican American, Asian American, Latino, and Native American) but also in
those European American communities that had supposedly been dominant
through the twentieth century but that actually had been downplaying their
ethnicity.
Although American culture was decidedly European American in essence
and influence from its beginnings, the assimilative process often meant that
individual European identities—Scandinavian as well as Slavic—were lost.
The multicultural movement of the 1970’s and 1980’s helped to recover and
reinvigorate a number of ethnic identities and literatures, and the last quar-
ter of the twentieth century saw the publication of many literary works reflect-
227
ing the change: ethnic autobiographies, accounts of the search for ethnic
roots, studies of ethnic culture and ethnic literatures, and novels and plays
about the ethnic experience. The European American experience was at the
center of this ethnic renaissance.
European American Identity and Literature Critics and scholars be-

gan to talk about ethnic literature only at the end of the period of unre-
stricted immigration, when the closed doors into the United States threw the
assimilative process into a sharper, harsher focus. Probably the keystone work
in this regard is Abraham Cahan’s The Rise of David Levinsky, published in
1917. As David M. Fine has written in The City, the Immigrant, and American Fic-
tion, 1880-1920 (1977), the novel
occupies a pivotal position in the history of American literature. It . . . stands at

the head of a long line of twentieth-century novels which would portray modern
urban America from the eyes of the city’s non-Anglo component. The novel’s
ambitious mixture of material success and spiritual failure, its insistence on the
high cost of assimilation, and its concern with the identity crisis bred by the
Americanization process place it squarely in the forefront of twentieth-century
“minority voice” fiction.
The themes that Fine lists permeated all immigrant literature, in nonfic-
tion (essay, autobiography) and in fiction (short story, novel), through the
twentieth century. Repeatedly after 1917, European American writers de-
picted in depth and detail the painful process of assimilation, the pull be-
tween native and adoptive cultures, the mixed feelings of insecurity and
hope. Where does my identity come from—the protagonists of dozens of
plays and novels and autobiographies asked—from which of my two selves? A
whole range of replies were given, from full assimilation to marginality, but
under the hegemonic hold of melting-pot theory, more often than not the re-
plies were unclear and confused.
In 1916, the critic Randolph Bourne posed the basic problem in his essay
“Trans-National America” by citing the failure of the melting pot. “We are all
foreign-born or the descendants of foreign-born,” the Anglo-Saxon Bourne
argued, and assimilation has clearly failed. “Assimilation, in other words, in-
stead of washing out the memories of Europe made them more and more in-
tensely real.” Bourne’s call for a truly multicultural and pluralistic “Trans-
National America” would not be heeded for more than half a century.
Mary Antin’s The Promised Land (1912) is a sensitive and touching account
of a young Jewish woman’s journey from rural Russia to urban America, and
represents one end of the assimilative continuum, since it is an autobiogra-
phy arguing for total Americanization. Her vivid description of the assimila-
tion process is told through stories like the one of her father accompanying
his children to their first day of school—and following his dream
228
The boasted freedom of the New World meant to him far more than the right to
reside, travel, and work wherever he pleased; it meant the freedom to speak his
thoughts, to throw off the shackles of superstition, to test his own fate, unhin-
dered by political or religious tyranny.
Other autobiographers of the period were less sure of the truth of the
American Dream. The Danish-born journalist Jacob Riis, who in How the Other
Half Lives (1890) describes the terrible conditions in New York City tene-
ments, narrates the struggles of his own life in The Making of an American
(1901) and urged his fellow Danish Americans to remain loyal to Denmark
and its traditions. Louis Adamic’s Laughing in the Jungle: The Autobiography of
an Immigrant in America (1932) and My America (1938) describe his journey
from Slovenia to America, criticize several aspects of American democracy,
and conclude that immigrants must take pride in the customs and qualities of
their lands of origin. Autobiography has often been a more common and
powerful literary genre than fiction, especially for ethnic writers, who could
use the form to wrestle with their immigrant history and try to figure out their
own identity. Ludwig Lewisohn’s Mid-Channel (1929) and Edward Bok’s The
Americanization of Edward Bok (1920), the one German Jewish and the other
Dutch, are two other examples of European American autobiography from
this period.
Perhaps the most poignant and powerful literary representative of early
European immigration was Anzia Yezierska, who traveled from Russian Po-
land to New York’s Lower East Side. Writing under her European name
(rather than Hattie Mayer, the name which she had been given at Ellis Is-
land), she was the only Jewish woman from eastern Europe of her generation
to produce a real body of fiction. Her novels and short stories, including Hun-
gry Hearts (stories, 1920) and Bread Givers (novel, 1925), depict the lives of
marginalized Americans, especially immigrant women.
These histories—of immigration and assimilation, of the hope and failure
of the American Dream—would be told again and again through the Great De-
pression of the 1930’s, and in spite of the restrictions facing European Ameri-
can writers. Carl Sandburg (a second-generation Swede) produced some of
the most powerful poetry about urban America written during the middle of
the twentieth century, in addition to writing a multivolume biography of a
true American hero, Abraham Lincoln. Sandburg never lost the working-
class perspective of his immigrant family. Likewise, William Saroyan produced
some of the most poignant descriptions of life in his Fresno, California, Ar-
menian community (The Daring Young Man on the Flying Trapeze, 1934, and My
Name Is Aram, 1940), and wrote plays, including The Time of Your Life (1939),
and novels, such as The Human Comedy (1943), that capture his genial spirit.
Other European American writers were depicting the struggles of life for
immigrants on the margin. Henry Roth in Call It Sleep (1934) follows a young
Austrian Jewish immigrant through his harrowing adventures in New York
City. Thomas Bell, in Out of This Furnace (1941), a novel of immigrant labor in
229
America, details the hardships

that faced his Slovak family in
the western Pennsylvania steel
mills. The two novels are com-
parable to a number of other
Depression-era works—Roth in
his implied criticism of capital-
ist society, and Bell in his argu-
ment that his characters should
be able to retain their native her-
itage.
The immigrant story was told
by nonimmigrant writers as well.
Upton Sinclair, in The Jungle
(1906), depicts the horrendous
working conditions which his
Lithuanian characters and other
eastern European immigrants
faced in the stockyards of Chi-
William Saroyan, the most prominent literary voice of cago. Willa Cather, in another
Armenian Americans. (D.C . Public Library) classic of American literature,
My Ántonia (1918), told the story
of a Bohemian family struggling to make a living on the Nebraska prairie.
The dying grandmother in Tillie Olsen’s powerful story “Tell Me a Riddle”
(1961) was once an orator during the 1905 Russian revolution.
In spite of the melting-pot theory that prevailed through the middle of the
twentieth century, in other words, writers continued to tap the rich vein of
their ethnic and immigrant roots. Many of the best descriptions of immi-
grant life—Roth’s and Olsen’s and Lewisohn’s, or Michael Gold’s Jews Without
Money (1930)—came from Jewish American writers whose sense of commu-
nity was so strong that they could more easily dip into that heritage. Saul Bel-
low and Bernard Malamud tapped that source after World War II, and Isaac
Bashevis Singer, who was born in Poland and emigrated to the United States
in 1935, and Cynthia Ozick have also explored it.
Immigration did not cease during the twentieth century for European
writers. Polish American writer Jerzy Kosinski, in the secretive style that char-
acterized so much of his life, fled his native Poland for America in an elabo-
rate scheme during the 1950’s and wrote about his childhood there during
World War II in the vivid novel The Painted Bird (1965). Vladimir Nabokov,
who was born in Russia and educated in England, lived and wrote in Germany
and France. In 1940, he came to the United States and produced some of his
most important novels after that date. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, on the other
hand, who emigrated to the United States from the Soviet Union during the
1970’s, never matched the literary power he had achieved when he was writ-
ing in his native Russia.
230
Irish American Literature Irish American literature is one of the oldest

and largest collections of writing produced by a European American group.
Before the Revolutionary War, the English were the majority of migrants to
America. After independence, it was the Irish: Between 1820 and 1930, more
than 4.25 million Irish immigrants came to the United States. For their first
decades, life was hard, and they faced constant discrimination. The sign “No
Irish Need Apply” could be seen on businesses into the twentieth century.
The people Henry David Thoreau mentions in Walden (1854) at the bottom
of the socioeconomic ladder are Native Americans, black slaves, and the Irish.
In spite of their tremendous difficulties, the Irish produced a cultural leg-
acy in the United States second to none. A number of major nineteenth cen-
tury writers—Henry James, Edgar Allan Poe, and William Dean Howells
among them—had Irish ancestry that played no part in their literature, but
dozens of writers used that heritage in their literary work. The first Irish
American writer to gain national prominence was Peter Finley Dunne, the
turn-of-twentieth-century newspaperman whose fictional Irish bartender Mr.
Dooley became the most popular figure in American journalism. Up until
World War I, Mr. Dooley commented in Dunne’s columns on every important
American political or social event—including immigration:
As a pilgrim father that missed the first boats, I must raise me claryon voice
again’ the invasion iv this fair land be th’ paupers an’ arnychists iv effete Eu-
rope. Ye bet I must—because I’m here first.
Playwright Eugene O’Neill with his third wife, Carlotta, in 1933. (Library of Congress)
231
Dunne’s sharp, often fatalistic hu-

mor was characteristic of much later
Irish American literature.
Several of the major twentieth
century American modernists were
Irish. F. Scott Fitzgerald boasted of
his Irish heritage, and a number of
minor Irish American characters
figure in his romantic novels and
short stories. In Fitzgerald’s unfin-
ished The Last Tycoon (1941) Irish
characters play major roles, and
Fitzgerald seems in that book to be
grappling with his own Irishness.
Perhaps the most important play-
wright of the American stage, Eu-
gene O’Neill, was the son of an
Irishman who had come to America
after the great potato famine. Some
of O’Neill’s masterpieces feature
Irish American characters. O’Neill Betty Smith, author of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, a
wrote about his family and trou- novel about the Irish experience in America.
bled childhood late in his career in
Long Day’s Journey into Night (1956).
James T. Farrell, in his Studs Lonigan: A Trilogy (1935) and in the later four
novels centering on the character of Danny O’Neill (including My Days of An-
ger, 1943), describes Irish families struggling on Chicago’s South Side to over-
come economic and personal oppression, often holding on to their ethnic
and religious prejudices. John O’Hara was much less sympathetic to his Irish
characters, and in his novels set in the fictional Gibbsville (resembling his na-
tive Pottsville, Pennsylvania), such as the 1934 Appointment in Samarra, the
Irish characters are usually outsiders and often contemptible.
Other writers in mid-century continued to add to the Irish American heri-
tage. Betty Smith, who was not Irish herself but who had grown up in the Irish
American Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, wrote one of the best novels
about the Irish experience in America in A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (1947). Mary
McCarthy’s novels occasionally contain Irish characters, and her Memories of a
Catholic Girlhood (1957) is a compelling account of growing up in America
during the early decades of the twentieth century. The Southerner Flannery
O’Connor’s novels and short stories are greatly influenced by her Irish Catho-
lic heritage.
Many Irish American writers, as might be expected, deal with the Irish in
the cities. Edwin O’Connor paints a masterful portrait of Boston Irish politi-
cal bosses in The Last Hurrah (1956), and William Kennedy’s novels about Al-
bany, New York (including Ironweed, 1983) have been critical and commercial
232
successes. Maureen Howard’s Natural History (1992) deals with the Irish
power structure in Bridgeport, Connecticut, early in the twentieth century.
Late twentieth century Irish American writers include the novelists Mary
Gordon, J. F. Powers, J. P. Donleavy, and T. Coraghessan Boyle, poets from
Frank O’Hara to Tess Gallagher, and journalists from the streetwise Jimmy
Breslin, Pete Hamill, and Joe Flaherty to the elegant Brendan Gill of The New
Yorker.
Italian American Literature The largest immigrant groups to arrive in

the latter part of the nineteenth century were southern and eastern Europe-
ans. Between 1820 and 1930, more than 4.5 million Italians arrived in the
United States, and, like the Irish Americans, they produced a number of writ-
ers whose work expressed particular awareness of their background.
Pietro di Donato’s Christ in Concrete (1939) depicts the squalid world of Ital-
ian construction workers, and is the classic expression of the Italian Ameri-
can experience. John Fante wrote a number of novels and short stories about
the Italian American experience: Wait Until Spring, Bandini (1938) tells of
family life in his native Colorado. Ask the Dust (1939) follows the hero, Arturo
Bandini, to Los Angeles, and Dago Red (1940) includes a number of family
sketches. Jerre Mangione in Monte Allegro (1943) tells of a son who returns to
Sicily and feels a mystical sense of being at home. The list of successful and
popular Italian American novelists runs from Paul Gallico through Mario
Puzo and Evan Hunter to Don De Lillo.
Italian American writers have in fact contributed to every literary genre.
Bernard DeVoto was one of the most important literary critics during the
middle of the twentieth century, and John Ciardi was a preeminent American
poet and translator. Lawrence Ferlinghetti and Gregory Corso were leading
members of the Beat movement of the 1950’s, and later poets include Helen
Barolini, Rose Basile Green, Diane DiPrima, and Dana Gioia. Finally, Italian
Americans have become prominent journalists. Philip Caputo’s A Rumor of
War (1977) is one of the best accounts of the Vietnam War, for example, and
Gay Talese has written a number of volumes of note, including Unto the Sons
(1992), about the Italian American immigrant experience.
Immigrant literature has often dealt with the American Dream, with its
promise as well as with its collapse. More than most literatures, the body of
work produced by European American writers has reflected the struggles of
assimilation, the loss of identity in that process, and the pain of being split be-
tween two cultures. The heroes and heroines of European American litera-
ture—David Levinsky, Studs Lonigan, and Arturo Bandini among them—are
often filled with self-doubt and search blindly for their identity. In those char-
acters and their struggles, their creators helped to expand the definition and
the canon of American literature.
David Peck
233
Further Reading
Banks, James A. Teaching Strategies for Ethnic Studies. Newton, Mass.: Allyn & Ba-
con, 1991. Useful for the student as well as the teacher; relates key themes
and concepts to texts.
wick, N.J.: Transaction, 2005. Collection of essays on the theme of ethnic
identity and its expression among immigrant communities.
Bourne, Randolph. The Radical Will: Selected Writings. Edited by Olaf Hansen.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992. An overview of Bourne’s
ideas.
Fine, David M. The City, the Immigrant, and American Fiction, 1880-1920.
Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1977. A starting place for study of immi-
grant fiction.
Fuchs, Lawrence H. The American Kaleidoscope: Race, Ethnicity, and the Civic Cul-
ture. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1990. Comprehen-
sive review of American culture, in the context of a non-melting-pot meta-
phor.
Glazer, Nathan, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Beyond the Melting Pot: The Ne-
groes, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press, 1963. A landmark of ethnic studies, centered on New
York City but with implications for ethnic studies in all America.
Greeley, Andrew. Ethnicity in the United States: A Preliminary Reconnaissance.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974. Ethnicity of European origin is the
focus.
Lowery, Ruth McKoy. Immigrants in Children’s Literature. New York: P. Lang,
2000. Examination of the depictions of immigrants in children’s fiction
that focuses on seventeen novels.
Novak, Michael. The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics: Politics and Culture in the
1970’s. New York: Macmillan, 1971. Central work in the revival of interest
in ethnicity during the 1970’s and after.
Sollors, Werner. Beyond Ethnicity: Consent and Descent in American Culture. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Argues that ethnic literature is the
prototypical American literature.
See also Euro-Americans; European immigrants, 1790-1892; European

immigrants, 1892-1943; Generational acculturation; German and Irish immi-
gration of the 1840’s; Gypsy immigrants; Irish immigrants; Italian immi-
grants; Melting pot; Nativism; Polish immigrants; Scandinavian immigrants;
White ethnics.
234
European immigrants, 1790-1892
European immigrants,
1790-1892
The Event: The first century of immigration after the ratification of the U.S.
Constitution
Date: 1790-1892
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Irish immigrants
Significance: Between 1790 and 1892, more than sixteen million Europeans
migrated to the United States. Because they constituted nearly one-third
of the total population and 53 percent of the urban residents, European
immigrants played a disproportionately important role in the develop-
ment of American intergroup relations.
In 1790, the initial U.S. Census was conducted and Congress passed the first
uniform naturalization law. For the next 102 years, more than 90 percent of
the immigrants came from Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, and Scandinavia
(“Old Immigrants”). In 1892, for the first time, more arrivals were from east-
ern and southern Europe (new immigrants) than from northern Europe.
During that same year, Ellis Island replaced the Castle Garden as the major re-
ceiving center for immigrants landing in New York when the federal govern-
ment took control of the process.
From 1821 to 1892, approximately 4.5 million German Protestants, Ro-
man Catholics, and Jews; 3.5 million Irish Catholics; 2.7 million British Prot-
estants; and 1 million Scandinavian Protestants emigrated, with more than
two-thirds coming to the United States. The Irish gravitated toward unskilled
labor in the eastern cities; the English, Welsh, and Scots often found work as
skilled laborers in this same region. Germans tended to find positions as
skilled craftspeople or in the trades in both eastern and midwestern cities.
Many Germans, Scandinavians, and Dutch became farmers in the Midwest.
Relations with the Dominant Culture At the onset of large-scale im-

migration, the descendants of the early colonists, who were mostly Protes-
tants of English and Scotch-Irish descent, dominated the United States in
numbers and control over society. They resented and discriminated against
the new arrivals for a variety of reasons. As a group, they were generally satis-
fied with their lives in the United States and had established an “American
culture” separate from that of Europe. A new wave of Europeans could dis-
rupt this. Consequently, many Americans became nativists, hoping to prevent
what they viewed as an immigrant “takeover” of the nation.
The hierarchical structure of Roman Catholicism, which they considered
at odds with the tenets of democracy, negatively affected the large Irish and
235
German Catholic population. Jews were still blamed for the death of Christ,
and many people overestimated their influence in the financial world. Al-
though American Protestants increasingly embraced temperance and prohi-
bition of alcoholic beverages, many Irish and German immigrants saw spirits
as a part of their culture. Irish, Welsh, and English laborers often believed
that organized labor was the key to better pay and working conditions; how-
ever, many native stock Americans felt that labor unions were in opposition to
American individualism and free labor capitalism. Germans and Scandina-
vians, who desired to maintain Old World languages and traditions, were
chastised for being un-American. All of these factors were responsible for di-
visions between colonial-stock Americans and the immigrants.
Relations Among Old Immigrants Despite commonalties of the ethnic

experience, the old immigrants never viewed themselves as a unified group.
Conflict between the groups was more apparent than cooperation. These dif-
ferences often had European roots that combined with American circum-
stances.
Religious differences continued to separate people in the United States as
they had in Europe. Almost all the British, Scandinavians, and Dutch were
Protestants, as were half of the Germans. Like their American counterparts,
the British Protestants were at odds with Irish Catholics. The religious differ-
ences in the German states were also brought to the United States. Individual
Germans viewed themselves as German Protestants, German Catholics, or
German Jews rather than as members of a single culture.
Political issues also divided the old immigrants. Catholics and urban labor-
ers, especially the Irish, gravitated toward the more open Democratic Party.
Cartoon in an 1881 issue of Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper showing Columbia—the symbol of
the United States—welcoming refugees from German oppression to the “asylum of the oppressed.”
236
European Immigration to the United States,

1821-1890
900,000
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000 European
500,000 revolutions
450,000 of 1848
400,000
350,000 1845-1849
300,000 Great Irish
250,000 Famine
200,000
150,000 1861-1865
100,000 U.S. Civil War
50,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
Protestant skilled workers and midwestern farmers believed that the Whigs,
and later the Republicans, reflected their interests of upward socioeconomic
mobility and conservative social values. Catholics and the less conservative
German Protestants objected to any laws restricting alcohol. Conversely, many
English, Welsh, and German Pietist Protestant immigrants abstained from li-
quor and favored its prohibition. In regard to slavery, unskilled Irish laborers
feared that emancipation could bring about competition with African Ameri-
cans for low-paying jobs; English, Welsh, and German skilled workers and
tradespeople believed that the extension of slavery would damage the free-
labor, capitalist economy.
The Assimilation Process The Americanization process for the older

group of immigrants was hastened because all ethnic groups began to enjoy
increased social and economic mobility by the latter part of the nineteenth
century and because the arrival of the new immigrants lifted them to a higher
level of social status.
237
The various ethnic groups achieved social and economic mobility differ-
ently. The English, Welsh, and Scots often moved from their skilled labor po-
sitions to become bosses, supervisors, and managers in corporate America.
They used the school systems to educate their children, who moved into pro-
fessional positions. Many descendants of the Welsh and English immigrants
became teachers and administrators in elementary and secondary education
systems, giving those groups a tremendous impact upon education in the
United States.
Working from positions as unskilled laborers, the Irish moved through the
corporate ranks. Politics was also a means of Irish mobility. Colonial-stock
Americans found local politics disdainful; however, the Irish recognized an
opportunity to gain political power in the growing urban areas. By the late
nineteenth century, many eastern cities were under the control of political
machines dominated by the Irish. Although colonial stock and other old im-
migrants criticized boss politics, the machines served the rapidly expanding
urban-ethnic community at a time when official government agencies were
lacking. The Irish were also able to gain mobility through their leadership in
the Roman Catholic Church. The church became a major force in American
life with the arrival of numerous Catholic immigrants. The Irish church hier-
archy was instrumental in sponsoring a vast educational network that edu-
cated all Catholics from elementary school through the university.
Germans and Scandinavians were perhaps less inclined to use higher edu-
cation as a means of mobility. However, as the United States rapidly ex-
panded, the services of German tradespeople and farmers were all the more
needed. This, in turn, brought about a growth in German businesses and
farms, resulting in the upward mobility of shipowners and workers alike. Ger-
man Jews, many of whom began as peddlers and small shopkeepers, were able
to expand their businesses to meet the increasing consumer demand. This
economic success combined with a strong emphasis upon education was re-
sponsible for a remarkable degree of socioeconomic mobility for German
Jews.
The arrival of ten million eastern and southern Europeans resulted in a
higher socioeconomic status for the old immigrants. The new arrivals pro-
vided a large labor pool to fill unskilled positions. The old immigrants could
move into the more lucrative skilled and management jobs or expand their
businesses to serve the growing population. Also, many of the values of the
northern European immigrants were more identifiable as American ideals.
To both colonial stock and old immigrants, the new immigrants appeared to
be considerably different. Consequently, the colonial stock found the old im-
migrants more acceptable.
By the mid-twentieth century, the descendants of the old immigrants were
less commonly viewed as distinct ethnic groups. The British found their heri-
tage largely assimilated into the larger American culture, and Germans’ eth-
nic identification diminished during the two world wars. Certain groups,
such as the Welsh and Scandinavians, still maintain ethnic institutions. How-
238
ever, these institutions are intended more to preserve the vestiges of the cul-
tures than to help immigrants deal with challenges in the United States. To
most observers, the descendants of the old immigrants are firmly entrenched
in mainstream American culture.
Paul J. Zbiek
Further Reading
Berthoff, Rowland. British Immigrants in Industrial America, 1790-1950. Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1953. Classic study of British im-
migration to the United States.
Dolan, Jay. The Immigrant Church: New York’s Irish and German Catholics, 1815-
1965. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975. Chronicles how
the Irish and Germans established Roman Catholicism in America.
and New, 1830-1930. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 2004. Com-
parative study of the different challenges faced by members of eight major
immigrant groups: the Irish, Germans, Scandinavians and Finns, eastern
European Jews, Italians, Poles and Hungarians, Chinese, and Mexicans.
Handlin, Oscar. The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migrations That Made the
American People. 2d ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973. Work by one of the pio-
neering scholars on ethnic history that deals extensively with the old immi-
grant period.
Van Vugt, William E. Britain to America: Mid-Nineteenth-Century Immigrants to the
United States. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999. Scholarly study of
nineteenth century immigrants to the United States from Great Britain.
Island. New York: Facts On File, 2002. History of immigration to the United
States from the earliest European settlements of the colonial era through
the mid-1950’s, with liberal extracts from contemporary documents.

1943; German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; German immigrants;
Italian immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Know-Nothing Party; Migration; Na-
tivism.
239
European immigrants,
1892-1943
The Event: The last major phase of European immigration to the United
States
Date: 1892-1943
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Nativism and racism
Significance: A new wave of southern European immigrants met with na-

tivist resentment and federal controls.
In 1808, the U.S. government purchased Ellis Island from the state of New
York for ten thousand dollars. The new federal property, located in New York
Harbor about one mile from the southern tip of Manhattan Island, served
first as a fort and later as an arsenal. Until 1882, the state of New York had
guided the influx of immigration from the old Castle Garden station at the tip
of Manhattan. The opening of Ellis Island on January 1, 1892, as the first fed-
eral immigration station symbolized a new era for the United States as well as
the beginning of the end of free immigration to the New World. San Fran-
cisco Bay’s Angel Island later served a similar role for immigrants entering
the United States on the West Coast.
Congress had begun the selective process of excluding undesirable ele-
ments among those emigrating to the United States with the passage of the
federal Immigration Act in 1882. That measure was designed to prevent the
immigration of persons who had criminal records and those who were men-
tally incompetent or indigent. That same year, Congress also passed the Chi-
nese Exclusion Act (later extended to all Asians), barring an entire national-
ity from entry as racially undesirable for a period of ten years. In 1904 the
act’s provisions were extended indefinitely, to be repealed only in 1943.
Immigration Patterns Shift Most immigrants before the 1890’s had

come from northern and western Europe. During the 1880’s a fundamental
change occurred. In addition to the traditional immigrants, who shared com-
mon language patterns with persons already in the United States, people
from Mediterranean and Slavic countries began to arrive in increasing num-
bers. One may measure the change more dramatically by comparing two peak
years in U.S. immigration. In 1882, 87 percent of the 788,000 immigrants
came from northern and western Europe. In 1907, only 19.3 percent were
from northern and western Europe, while 80.7 percent came from southern
and eastern Europe.
A great impetus to immigration was the transportation revolution engen-
dered by the steamship. In 1856, more than 96 percent of U.S. immigrants
240
came aboard sailing ships, on trips that took between one and three months.
By 1873, the same percentage came by steamships, which took only ten days.
The new steamships were specifically designed for passengers, and while still
subject to overcrowding and epidemics, they were a major improvement over
the sailing ships. Steamship companies competed for immigrant business
and maintained offices in Europe. The Hamburg-Amerika line, for example,
had thirty-two hundred U.S. agencies throughout Europe. More than half of
the immigrants in 1901 came with prepaid tickets supplied by relatives in the
United States.
As the older agricultural economy of Europe was replaced by an industrial
one, many former farmers moved to European cities in search of employ-
ment; often unsuccessful in that search, they were easily persuaded to try the
New World, where jobs were said to be plentiful. The same railroad-building
process that opened the American West to the immigrant made it easier and
cheaper for the Europeans to reach their coastal areas and embark for the
United States.
Most of the emigration from southern Europe was occasioned by eco-
nomic distress. Southern Italy’s agriculture was severely affected by competi-
tion from Florida in oranges and lemons, as well as by a French tariff against
Italian wines. The Italian emigration began with 12,000 in 1880 and reached
a peak of nearly 300,000 in 1914. After immigration restriction laws took full
effect, Italian immigration fell to 6,203 in 1925.
Immigrants arriving at Ellis Island in 1902. Through this reception center, New York City was the
principal port of entry for European immigrants from 1892 until 1954. (Library of Congress)
241
European immigrants being processed inside Ellis Island’s vast reception center around 1904. (Li-
brary of Congress)
From Russia and the Slavic areas, emigration was also caused by political
and religious problems. Jews fled in reaction to the riots set off by the assassi-
nation of Czar Alexander II in 1882, the pogroms of 1881-1882 and 1891, and
the 1905-1906 massacres of thousands of Jews. Jewish immigration to the
United States began with 5,000 in 1880 and reached a peak of 258,000 in
1907. Some two million Roman Catholic Poles also arrived between 1890 and
1914. In 1925, however, the Immigration Service recorded only 5,341 en-
trants from Poland and 3,121 from Russia and the Baltic states.
Nativist Fears Two issues caused the greatest concern to American nativ-
ists during the 1890’s: the tendency of the new immigrants to congregate in
the cities, and the fact that they spoke seemingly unassimilable languages.
One of the first articulate spokesmen against unrestricted immigration, the
Reverend Dr. Josiah Strong, was alarmed by the concentration of foreign peo-
ples in cities. Strong’s famous book, Our Country, published in 1885, clearly
stated what many other U.S. citizens feared: that the new influx of immigrants
would create permanent slums and perpetuate poverty.
242
The urban nature of the settlement was unavoidable. U.S. agriculture was
suffering from the same shocks that had disrupted European agriculture,
and the populist movement in the country made clear that the myth of utopia
in the western United States was no longer believable. Most of the new immi-
grants were attracted by the pull of U.S. industry and opportunity, and they
came to the United States with the express purpose of settling in a city. In ad-
dition, new industrial technology had reduced the demand for skilled labor,
while the need for unskilled and cheap factory help increased. To add to the
social clash between the new and old immigrants, the arrival of a new labor
force in great numbers probably allowed some older laborers to move up to
more important supervisory and executive positions.
Many new immigrants did not share the optimism and enthusiasm of estab-
lished Americans. Some tended to be pessimistic and resigned, distrustful of
change, and unfamiliar with democratic government after having lived in au-
tocratic situations. At the height of the new immigration occurred the Panic
of 1893, followed by a depression that lasted until 1897, which seemed to con-
European Immigration to the United States,

1891-2003
900,000 1914-1917
850,000 World War I
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000 1946-1989
350,000 Cold War
300,000
250,000 1939-1945
200,000 World War II
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
243
firm the fears of persons already settled in the United States that the country
and the system were failing. The new immigration, however, was but one of
the major social, cultural, and economic changes taking place in the turbu-
lent United States of the 1890’s.
In 1907, Congress created the Dillingham Commission to investigate the
problems of immigration. Many of the commission’s findings reflected the
fears of citizens concerning the new immigration and led to the passage of re-
strictive legislation during the 1920’s. Unrestricted immigration ended with
the passage of the National Origins Act of 1924, which restricted immigrants
in any year to 154,277. Each country’s quota could be no more than 2 percent
of the number of its native inhabitants counted in the 1890 census, a year in
which few born in southern and eastern Europe were part of the U.S. popula-
tion.
When Ellis Island closed as a reception center in 1954, few immigrants still
arrived by ship, and the Immigration Service could handle all arrivals at
Manhattan’s docks. When the Atlantic reopened after World War II, planes
began to replace ships as vehicles of immigration, and there was no need for
Ellis Island. By that time, much of the fear of the “new” immigration had evap-
orated. Italian, Slavs, and Jews had not remained in permanent slums, mired
in perpetual poverty, as Strong had feared, and their descendants had fought
side by side with U.S. soldiers of British and German ancestry against the Na-
zis and the Japanese.
During the 1940’s, there was much criticism of the rigidity of the immigra-
tion restriction legislation that hampered attempts to deal with the problems
of refugees. Not until 1965, however, would the rigid quota system established
in 1924 be replaced with a more flexible system. When that reform opened
the door to increased entry by Asians and Latin Americans, complaints about
the new “new immigrants” began to echo nineteenth century uneasiness
about the former “new immigrants.”
Richard H. Collin
updated by Milton Berman
Further Reading
Briggs, Vernon M. Mass Immigration and the National Interest. Armonk, N.Y.:
M. E. Sharpe, 1992. An economist argues that nineteenth and early twenti-
eth century immigration aided the U.S. economy but the post-1965 immi-
gration does not.
Brownstone, David M., Irene M. Franck, and Douglas L. Brownstone, eds. Is-
land of Hope, Island of Tears. New York: Penguin Books, 1986. Interviews
with elderly people who went through Ellis Island during the early years of
the twentieth century provide highly personal accounts of the “new” immi-
grants. Many photographs.
Daniels, Roger. Coming to America: A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in
American Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. A well-written, scholarly ac-
count of U.S. immigration from the colonial period through the 1980’s.
244
Dinnerstein, Leonard, Roger H. Nichols, and David H. Reimers. Natives and

Strangers: Blacks, Indians, and Immigrants in America. 2d ed. New York: Ox-
ford University Press, 1990. A comparative study of immigrant and minor-
ity groups in the United States.
history, from the mid-eighteenth century to the early twenty-first century,
with an emphasis on cultural and social trends, with attention to ethnic
conflicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
Handlin, Oscar. The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migrations That Made the
American People. 2d ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973. Dramatic narrative fo-
cusing on the life experiences of immigrants.
Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925.
New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1955. Analyzes the nativist
movements that led to the passage of immigration restriction.
Reimers, David M. Still the Golden Door: The Third World Comes to America. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1985. Study of twentieth century immi-
gration to the United States, primarily after World War II.
Sandler, Martin W. Island of Hope: The Story of Ellis Island and the Journey to Amer-
ica. New York: Scholastic, 2004. History of the most important immigrant
reception, from 1892 through 1954. Written for younger readers.
Vought, Hans Peter. Redefining the “Melting Pot”: American Presidents and the Im-
migrant, 1897-1933. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI, 2001.
See also Eastern European Jewish immigrants; European immigrant liter-

ature; European immigrants, 1790-1892; German and Irish immigration of
the 1840’s; German immigrants; Immigration Act of 1917; Immigration Act
of 1924; Italian immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Migration; Polish immi-
grants; War brides.
245
Family businesses
Family businesses
Definition: Commercial enterprises owned and operated by individual fami-
lies
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Cuban immigrants; Economics;

Families and marriage; Labor
Significance: Family businesses, which represent the oldest form of business

enterprise in the world, continue to affect the U.S. economy during the
twenty-first century, and they play a special role in many immigrant com-
munities.
From ancient pottery makers of Mesopotamia to the family farm of nine-

teenth century America, a natural form of business organization consisted of
using the varied talents of family members to achieve efficiency. Indeed, the
very concept of “home economics” implies that all families had to operate—
at times—like businesses in their allocation of scarce resources and utiliza-
tion of labor. The rise of the modern corporation during the mid-nineteenth
century reduced the overall influence of family firms on the economies of na-
tions but did not eliminate family businesses or reduce their popularity.
Prior to the mid-nineteenth century, most business organizations, espe-
cially in the United States, were family firms. These included farms, planta-
tions, small shops, and factories and covered areas of endeavor as varied as
banking, mining, textile manufacturing, bookselling, and rice planting. In
family firms on farms or plantations, husbands generally oversaw “outdoor”
activities, such as planting, harvesting and mining. In the case of artisans or
merchants, husbands managed the shop floor or store office. On farms, wives
managed purchases for personnel, and on larger plantations they managed
the “inside” work related to the plantation houses and slave quarters, such as
clothing and feeding the people in residence as well as their own family mem-
bers.
In cities, wives helped clean stores, keep books, take orders, and—in cases
of illness or death of their husbands—they actually managed the businesses.
Children were viewed as a source of unpaid labor, with the understanding
that they were learning a trade as well as earning their keep. In some cases,
parents sent male children to other merchants or artisans as apprentices to
“learn the business,” as was the case with the American banker J. P. Morgan.
The division of labor allowed the family to retain as profits all the money they
would have had to spend paying laborers and training employees.
Immigrants and Family Businesses For generations, immigrants have

constituted an important segment of family businesses, from Italian restau-
rants to Japanese gardening services. Beginning during the 1960’s and 1970’s,
246
Family businesses
new waves of Cuban, Vietnamese, Lebanese, and Mexican immigrants came

to the United States. More than 200,000 Cubans arrived in Florida in the first
two years after Fidel Castro came to power, creating 25,000 new businesses in
Dade County alone. Michael Zabian, a Lebanese refugee who settled in Lee,
Massachusetts, developed a family-run business that eventually encompassed
a grocery store and a department store.
Numerous studies of Haitian, Jamaican, and Vietnamese families in the
United States have shown that they capitalize on family labor to achieve busi-
ness success. As a result, they have higher per-capita incomes than many white
families. Proportionally, far more black Jamaicans, Haitians, and Dominicans
in the United States run businesses than American-born whites.
Child labor laws and compulsory education have limited the extent to
which immigrants have been able to utilize family labor to expand family
wealth. Moreover, not all immigrants have the same cultural perspectives.
Adult Chinese immigrants, for example, sometimes work extra hours so that
their children can concentrate on their education. Immigrant couples often
run businesses as a team. More often, however, immigrant wives manage their
households while their husbands concentrate on their family businesses.
The key to these immigrants’ success—and that of previous generations of
European immigrants—is their commitment to hard work through harness-
ing the efforts of their extended families. Lebanese businesses, for example,
Members of a Chinese family posing in front of their New York City grocery store. (Smithsonian In-
stitution)
247
Family businesses
stay open between sixteen and eighteen hours a day. A study of Korean family
businesses in Atlanta found that they worked an average of sixty hours a week.
The work habits of Jamaican immigrant families were so pronounced that
they were spoofed in many of the skits performed on the cutting-edge variety
series In Living Color. However, most statistics concerning wealth accumula-
tion in the United States have not accounted for the labor or on-the-job expe-
rience gains of family members, thus dramatically underestimating the value
and influence of family-owned companies. Ironically, legislation designed to
limit part-time work and require minimum wages has reinvigorated family
businesses paying no detectable wages at all, for families’ children have be-
come the only labor that many low-profit operations can afford.
Government Regulations and Family Businesses As immigrants have

quickly learned, many of the regulations enacted between 1960 and 1990
have enhanced the desirability of owning small businesses predominantly op-
erated by family members. Small dry cleaners, independent restaurants, or
tanning salons cannot hire many employees at the increasing minimum wage
rates and stay competitive. People hoping to develop and sell new products
and needing employees to operate telephones and offices cannot afford the
rising taxes required by the government. Very few small businesses can begin
to comply with the blizzard of regulations related to employee health and
protection, sexual harassment, disabilities acts, and dozens of other expen-
sive laws and regulations. As a result, small firms have increasingly turned to
family members to help operate their businesses. There is no way of deter-
mining how many of the 14 million sole proprietorships in the United States
in 1995 were family firms, but evidence suggests that the number was large
and growing, as witnessed by the fact that “microbusinesses” (firms with fewer
than five employees) constituted the most rapidly growing category of all en-
terprises.
The arrival of widespread computer technology and the Internet, with its
commercial operations on the World Wide Web, have accelerated the expan-
sion of microbusinesses and broadened the appeal of the family firm. A fam-
ily of four, with a capable teenager who is computer competent, can operate a
thriving Web-based business from the home, thus avoiding government regu-
lations that apply to hired employees. This is seen in the fact that most corpo-
rations have less than $100,000 in total assets. Yet while the U.S. economy has
continued to grow, the sales of the top corporations has fallen steadily as a
share of gross national product (GNP), buoyed only by the spectacular rise of
a few companies such as Microsoft.
One of the most rapidly rising new areas of family business—again, popu-
lated by immigrants—are nail salons. By 1996 nail salons constituted a $6 bil-
lion business (equal to that of the video game market dominated by Japa-
nese corporations such as Nintendo), a figure that industry analysts suggest
underestimates the level of activity. Family-owned salons have appeared in
“upscale” malls, and in Los Angeles County alone the number of nail techni-
248
Family businesses
cians rose from 9,700 to 15,200 in five years, with more than 80 percent being
Vietnamese-born. During the 1980’s virtually no economist predicted the
growth of such family businesses, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics did not
even track the listing for manicurists as late as 1979.
A significant problem facing small business family firms, which has impli-
cations for the entire family, is that nearly half of the 800,000 new firms
launched annually fail. The central fact of entrepreneurial life is that of risk,
and every family enterprise confronts the competition of the market each
day. Unlike arrangements whereby family members might be employed by
different companies and are thus somewhat protected against layoffs or busi-
ness failures, family business failures can imperil the structure of the family it-
self. Yet, virtually all of the founders of successful family businesses have failed
at least once. Automobile manufacturer Henry Ford, banker A. P. Giannini,
and retailer Sam Walton all either declared bankruptcy or were kicked out of
companies they created.
In general, most small firms have small annual incomes hovering around
$16,000, as compared to General Motors’ annual sales of $126 billion. Never-
theless, many family-owned small businesses remain small deliberately, with
adults choosing to work fewer hours or to be less aggressive at expanding
their enterprises in order to focus on nonbusiness family relationships. The
number of individual family businesses that become large, however, repre-
sents an ever-increasing share of all business activity, because the overall pool
of small businesses and family firms continues to swell.
Expansion of the Internet can further accelerate the advantages already
enjoyed by home-based, family-run operations. In 1997, the Internet service
provider America Online recorded more than 16 million “log ons” in a single
day, most of which the government has little control over. Businesses can take
and ship orders, determine customer satisfaction, and maintain all records
without expanding their employee base outside the family. The economic
cost of regulation and taxation facing large firms with many employees, com-
bined with the computer/Internet revolution, can accelerate the increasing
number of family businesses and their influence on the market. Mandatory
retirement ages and the desperate need for reliable employees by small busi-
nesses means that retirees will increasingly be approached by family members
for part-time employment. Finally, family farms—the essence of the family
business in previous eras—still exist and even thrive in modern society.
Larry Schweikart
Further Reading
249
Family businesses
Bruchey, Stuart, ed. Small Business in American Life. New York. Columbia Uni-
versity Press, 1980. Essay collection that features an excellent overview by
the author and contains a number of specialized, highly useful essays on
small business growth and operations.
ered is immigrant businesses.
Gilder, George. Recapturing the Spirit of Enterprise. San Francisco: C. S. Press,
1992. An updated version of Gilder’s The Spirit of Enterprise (1984), this
work approaches entrepreneurship with attention to analysis of macroeco-
nomic data and to numerous case studies.
Kretsedemas, Philip, and Ana Aparicio, eds. Immigrants, Welfare Reform, and
the Poverty of Policy. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2004. Collection of articles
on topics relating to the economic problems of new immigrants in the
United States, with particular attention to Haitian, Hispanic, and South-
east Asian immigrants.
Min, Pyong Gap. Ethnic Business Enterprise: Korean Small Business in Atlanta.
New York: Center for Migration Studies, 1988. Excellent source dealing
with the situation of Korean small businesses.
Neff, Alixa. “Lebanese Immigration into the United States: 1880 to the Pres-
ent.” In The Lebanese in the World: A Century of Emigration, edited by Albert
Hourani and Nadim Shehadi. London: Taurus, 1992. Details the history of
Lebanese immigration to the United States.
Park, Lisa Sun-Hee. Consuming Citizenship: Children of Asian Immigrant Entrepre-
neurs. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2005. Cultural study of
Asian immigrants who operate family businesses.
Schweikart, Larry. “Business and the Economy.” In American Decades: The
1950’s, edited by Richard Layman. Detroit: Gale Publications, 1994. In-
cludes material dating to World War II dealing with such business develop-
ments as franchises, the revival of the family firm, and the dominance of
large corporations.
Sowell, Thomas. Race and Culture: A World View. New York: Basic Books, 1994.
Synthesizes a great array of data on immigrants to various nations, empha-
sizing their contributions to the economies in their new homes.
Yoon, In-Jin. On My Own: Korean Businesses and Race Relations in America. Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Press, 1997. Study of the highly entrepeneurial
Korean immigrants.
See also Jews and Arab Americans; Korean immigrants; Korean immi-
grants and African Americans; Korean immigrants and family customs.
250
Farmworkers’ union
The Event: Formation of the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA)—
a predecessor to the United Farm Workers of America (UFW), the first
permanent agricultural workers’ union in the United States
Date: September 30, 1962
Place: Fresno, California
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Economics; Labor; Mexican

immigrants
Significance: The organization of farmworkers brought the plight of both

American and immigrant farmworkers to the attention of the public and
called attention to the suffering and indignities farmworkers endured.
Throughout the twentieth century farmworkers struggled to organize them-

selves against a politico-agribusiness complex that has been rather successful
at resisting them. Only after the mid-1960’s did working conditions for farm-
workers begin to improve substantially. Improvements in income and work-
ing conditions have been the direct results of the termination of the bracero
program as well as the struggles for union recognition and collective bargain-
ing by the United Farm Workers of America (UFW) and its organizational
predecessors, the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA) and the
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee (UFWOC). The September,
1962, founding of the NFWA in Fresno, California, by César Chávez, Dolores
Huerta, and others signaled a new era in the efforts by farmworkers to union-
ize and bargain collectively with their employers, mostly large agricultural
growers.
In 1966, Chicanos and Mexicanos in the NFWA and Filipino farmworkers
in the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC), an affiliate of
the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations
(AFL-CIO), merged organizations to form the UFWOC. In February of 1972,
the UFWOC became a full-fledged affiliate of the AFL-CIO and formed the
UFW. In 1975, straggles by the UFW culminated in the passage of the Agri-
cultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA) by the California legislature. Led by
Chávez and Huerta, the NFWA brought years of community organizing expe-
rience to bear on the problems of farmworkers. These problems included
economic hardship, general powerlessness against employers, and the lack of
adequate facilities in the fields.
Establishment of the NFWA The NFWA was established as an indepen-

dent, service-oriented, Chicano farmworkers’ labor organization that pro-
vided credit, burial, and other family services. It sought to organize farm-
workers one by one. Prior to the 1960’s one important factor hindering the
251
unionization of farmworkers was the bracero program, which was established

under the Emergency Labor Program of 1942 to ease the labor shortage
brought on by World War II. The bracero program supervised the recruit-
ment of Mexican nationals to meet U.S. growers demands for labor. It was
continued by Public Law 78 after the end of World War II and was maintained
until 1963, when PL 78 expired.
During the 1950’s, Mexican braceros greatly influenced the unionization
of U.S. farmworkers. By serving as alternate sources of cheap labor, they often
were used as strikebreakers by growers. In 1947, the newly founded National
Farm Labor Union (NFLU) led a strike against the powerful Di Giorgio Fruit
Corporation at Arvin, California. The union demanded an increase in wages,
seniority rights, grievance procedures, and recognition of the union as sole
bargaining agent. Robert Di Giorgio refused the demands and launched an
assault on the NFLU. He used braceros as strikebreakers and manipulated
both the press and politicians in his favor. The U.S. Senate Committee on Un-
American Activities set upon investigating the union.
In 1949, a special subcommittee of the House of Representatives’ Educa-
tion and Labor Committee held hearings on the Di Giorgio strike. The com-
mittee supported the growers and Di Giorgio won the strike. This particular
strike taught Ernesto Galarza, one of the strike leaders, an important lesson
in the struggle between farmworkers and growers. In his view, farmworkers
could not be organized until growers’ access to exploitable immigrant labor
groups was halted. Braceros, as international migrant workers, were more ex-
ploitable than American workers. If they tried to organize, they were labeled
as communists and deported.
Federal Government Involvement Those braceros seen by growers as

causing unrest among farmworkers were often reported to the Immigration
Service, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Justice, each of
which would investigate the “leaders” for violations of U.S. laws. Conse-
quently, during the 1950’s, there was not a single strike by braceros, although
the NFLU continued to organize strikes among other farmworkers. In 1960,
when the NFLU surrendered its charter, the AWOC replaced it. AWOC was
the AFL-CIO’s new organizational effort to organize farmworkers. With the
aid of the United Packinghouse Workers (UPWA), AWOC quickly initiated
farmworkers’ strikes in the lettuce fields of the Imperial Valley in California.
The AWOC-UPWA effort was based on the enforcement of federal regula-
tions that prohibited the use of braceros on ranches where there were strikes.
Although these initial strikes were successful, competition from the Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Teamsters led to the demise of the AWOC-UPWA ef-
fort. In the period following these strikes, AWOC membership declined as a
result of disillusionment, leaving only a group of Filipino agricultural workers
as members. By 1962, the year the NFWA was founded, economic conditions
for farmworkers had worsened as a result of increased mechanization on
farms and the continued negative impact of the bracero program on union-
252
ization efforts. In 1965, farmworkers in Tulare County, California, lived in di-

lapidated labor camps condemned by the Tulare Housing Authority. The la-
bor camps had been built by the U.S. Farm Security Administration near the
end of the Great Depression to provide temporary shelters for Dust Bowl mi-
grants. Condemnation led to rent increases meant to yield the necessary reve-
nue to build new housing.
Strikes Late in the summer of 1965, the NFWA led rent strikes among farm-
workers. The rent strike at Woodville, one of the labor camps, evolved into an
employment strike at the nearby J. D. Martin Ranch. Strikers complained
about low pay, the lack of toilets in the fields, and a peeping crew boss. The
strike failed. Within two weeks, however, the NFWA became involved in a
strike for higher wages initiated by the Filipino membership of the AWOC
local at Delano. On September 16, 1965, the NFWA formally joined the De-
lano Grape Strike. Four days later NFWA picket leaders asked farmworkers to
walk off the fields. The AWOC-NFWA strike spread throughout the Delano-
Earlimart-McFarland area, affecting approximately thirty ranches and involv-
ing several hundred farmworkers. Hundreds of college students, civil rights
workers, and religious groups joined the farmworkers within days of the onset
of the strike. Civil rights organizations quickly sent members of their staff to
help with the strike.
In October, under the charismatic leadership of Chávez, the NFWA launched
a grape boycott. Supporters quickly started picketing stores and piers through-
out California. In response, growers began to bully picketers, often in the
presence of law enforcement officials who did nothing to stop them. Growers
also resorted to spraying sulfur near the picket lines. The strike continued to
gain momentum, and within two weeks nearly four thousand farmworkers
were out of the fields. Many growers were not economically hurt because they
were able to import workers from neighboring cities who were willing to cross
picket lines to work. Strike leaders began to spread word of the strike to farm-
workers in neighboring areas. In March, 1966, the U.S. Senate Subcommittee
on Migratory Labor conducted public hearings in Delano and other nearby
cities.
At the Delano hearings, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, a member of the sub-
committee, reminded the local sheriff to brush up on the rights of all people,
including farmworkers. In 1966, some growers slowly began to settle with the
strikers; others continued to hold out, turning instead to the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters Union for “sweetheart contracts.” The strike con-
tinued through the years 1966 and 1967.
In 1968, the union, now called the United Farm Workers Organizing Com-
mittee (UFWOC), extended its boycott to include every California grower of
table grapes. Slowly, more individual growers agreed to recognize the union,
but many powerful others continued to hold out. Finally, in July of 1970,
UFWOC scored the largest victory in the history of farm-labor organizing
when several of the most powerful growers agreed to the union’s demands,
253
Image Not Available
thereby officially ending the strike. Several other victories by the UFWOC fol-
lowed during the next several months. Farmworkers had finally achieved
union recognition among growers and begun to participate in the collective
bargaining process. Conflict with the Teamsters, however, continued to thwart
the union, which had again changed its name and was known as the United
Farm Workers of America (UFW). In 1975, the UFW was instrumental in the
passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA) in California. The
ALRA brought some order to the rivalry between the UFW and the Team-
sters.
The Union’s Impact The major consequences stemming from the found-
ing of the National Farm Workers Association in 1962 were the eventual es-
tablishment of a permanent farmworkers’ labor union and passage of the
ALRA in California. The farmworkers forced growers to recognize their union
and to agree to collective bargaining. This meant improvements in wages and
working conditions for farmworkers. The ALRA eliminated “sweetheart con-
tracts,” permitted union organizers on the property of employers, and estab-
lished a California Agricultural Labor Relations Board that, among other
things, conducted elections, determined bargaining units, and investigated
unfair labor practices.
The ALRA also prohibited secondary boycotts, which stop the delivery of
goods from primary employers (growers) to secondary employers (retail
stores), but permitted unions to organize consumer boycotts by discouraging
254
the public from trading with stores. Within a few months of the passage of the
ALRA, over four hundred union representation elections were held. Mexican
immigrants, Chicanos, and other poor groups have provided a steady supply
of cheap labor to agribusiness, especially in the Southwest. In order to main-
tain access to cheap labor and to thwart unionization efforts, growers have
generally been highly supportive of unrestricted immigration from Mexico.
Efforts by farmworkers to organize unions and bargain collectively have
been brutally suppressed by growers, who often have had local criminal jus-
tice systems and federal immigration agencies on their side during periods of
labor disputes. Growers’ use of sheriffs, police officers, judges, strikebreak-
ers, and private armies against farmworkers were common. Indeed, the U.S.
government itself, through the bracero program, was a “labor contractor” for
growers.
The NFWA brought the plight of the farmworkers to the forefront of
America’s conscience and highlighted the suffering and indignities farm-
workers were forced to endure. It also marked the inception of the farm-
workers’ first permanent, broad-based organization. Chicano and Filipino
farmworkers, long neglected by labor legislation and traditional trade unions,
organized their own independent labor union and assumed their rights to
organize and bargain collectively with their employers. The Delano Grape
Strike, begun in September of 1965, propelled César Chávez and the NFWA
to the front of the civil and labor rights struggles.
Chávez turned the strike into a crusade by promoting the view that
farmworkers are human beings who deserve respect and a living wage. In
1968, he fasted for twenty-five days in order to gain support for the farm-
workers’ struggle. He ended the fast by “breaking bread” with Senator Robert
Kennedy, then a candidate for the U.S. presidency. Chávez’s nonviolent ap-
proach and charismatic qualities brought dignity and strength to the farm-
workers and greatly influenced the consciousness of Americans. Through use
of the consumer boycott, farmworkers were able to involve the American pub-
lic in their struggle for human and union recognition. As a result, Americans
“discovered” the farmworkers, who through their own efforts affirmed and
reclaimed their humanity. Their struggles did not end, however. Pro-grower
politicians and bureaucrats have continued to pose problems, and wide-
spread use of toxic pesticides by growers has continued to affect the health
and well-being of farmworkers.
Rubén O. Martinez
Further Reading
Acuña, Rodolfo. Occupied America: A History of Chicanos. 3d ed. New York:
Harper & Row, 1988. General history of Chicanos. It includes detailed sec-
tions on Chicano agricultural labor organizing, tracing Chicano labor
struggles to the turn of the century. It also details labor struggles in other
sectors of the economy.
255
Briggs, Vernon M. Immigration and American Unionism. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell
University Press, 2001. Scholarly survey of the dynamic interaction be-
tween unionism and immigration. Covers the entire sweep of U.S. national
history, with an emphasis on the nineteenth century.
United States.
Dunne, John Gregory. Delano. Rev. ed. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux,
1971. Detailed description of the events leading up to the formation of the
United Farm Workers of America. It also describes the union’s organizing
efforts during the 1960’s.
Galarza, Ernesto. Merchants of Labor: The Mexican Bracero Story. Charlotte,
N.C.: McNally & Loftin, 1964. Excellent historical analysis of the bracero
program from its inception to 1960. Examines the structure of control af-
fecting the lives of Mexican nationals and American agricultural workers
in the fields.
to the United States. Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm, 2005. Historical study of Mex-
ican farmworkers in the United States that examines the subject in the con-
text of American dominance over Mexico.
Hernandez, Donald J., ed. Children of Immigrants: Health, Adjustment, and Pub-
lic Assistance. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999. Collection
of papers on issues of public health and welfare among immigrants to the
United States, with extensive attention to immigrant farmworkers.
Kushner, Sam. Long Road to Delano. New York: International Publishers, 1975.
Provides a class analysis of the development of agribusiness in California. It
describes farmworkers’ working conditions and their struggles against ex-
ploitation. There is a chapter on the organizing efforts of the Communist
Party during the 1930’s among farmworkers. The foreword is by Bert Co-
rona, a major Chicano community leader.
Milkman, Ruth, ed. Organizing Immigrants: The Challenge for Unions in Contem-
porary California. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press, 2000. Broad study of unionism
and immigrants in the nation’s most populous state.
256
Federal riot of 1799
Nelson, Eugene. Huelga: The First Hundred Days of the Great Delano Grape Strike.
Delano, Calif.: Farm Worker Press, 1966. Brief account of the events that
led up to the Delano Grape Strike and details the activities up to Decem-
ber, 1965. Written by one of the organizers of the strike, the book captures
the mood and views of the farmworkers. Contains several photographs, in-
cluding some of law enforcement officials and strikebreakers.
Taylor, Ronald B. Chávez and the Farm Workers: A Study in the Acquisition and Use
of Power. Boston: Beacon Press, 1975. Provides a sympathetic description of
the César Chávez-led farmworkers’ struggles during the 1960’s and early
1970’s. In particular, the book details some of the struggles the farm-
workers had with the Teamsters union. Contains some photographs, in-
cluding one of Chávez and Robert Kennedy.
See also Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance; Bracero program; Chi-
cano movement; Latinos; Latinos and employment; Mexican American Legal
Defense and Education Fund; Mexican deportations during the Depression;
Undocumented workers.
Federal riot of 1799

The Event: Public riot in protest of the federal government’s passage of the
Date: February 10, 1799
Place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Immigration issues: Government and politics; Irish immigrants
Significance: A turning point in intergroup relations in the United States,

the federal riot became a symbol of conflict between an established, domi-
nant group and an incoming immigrant population.
A riot at Saint Mary’s Church in Philadelphia in February, 1799, was the di-
rect result of the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. These four
laws—the Naturalization Act, the Alien Act, the Alien Enemies Act, and the
Sedition Act—had been passed in June and July and sought collectively to
limit the rights of immigrants and to silence criticism of the new U.S. govern-
ment. Two main political factions dominated at the time, the conservative
Federalists and the Jeffersonian Republicans. Federalists were mainly the
wealthy and established, and Roman Catholics as well as Protestants were
among this group.
Saint Mary’s Church, considered one of the most venerable and well-
respected Catholic congregations in the United States, counted many of
these Federalists among its members and included both established Anglo-
257
Filipino immigrants
Americans and Irish Americans. Republicans were made up largely of immi-

grants, including many new Irish immigrants, and these less affluent and
newer Americans felt the impact of the Alien and Sedition Acts most sharply.
They circulated petitions protesting the acts and gathered signatures through-
out Philadelphia without incident. They intended to present the petitions to
Congress.
Four of these immigrant Republicans—James Reynolds, Samuel Cummings,
Robert Moore, and William Duane—posted fliers protesting the Alien and
Sedition Acts at Saint Mary’s, again requesting signatures from the Irish mem-
bers of the congregation. Following the February 10, 1799, Sunday service at
Saint Mary’s, a violent confrontation took place between these men and
members of the congregation. The four were tried on February 21, 1799, for
causing the riot. Saint Mary’s Father Leonard Neale, who had accused the
men, strongly condemned the actions of the Republicans, while Father Mat-
thew Carr testified that it was a long-honored tradition in Ireland to post no-
tices and seek support for petitions following church services. The jury deliv-
ered a verdict of “not guilty” to the charge of causing a riot.
The riot signified a turning point during the early history of intergroup re-
lations in the United States. Although the short-range effect of this conflict
was to weaken the Federalist hold within Saint Mary’s congregation, the
“Irish riot” became a symbol of conflict between an established, dominant
group and an incoming immigrant population. Such conflicts would charac-
terize much of U.S. history.
Kathleen Schongar
Further Reading
Elkins, Stanley, and Eric McKitrick. The Age of Federalism: The Early American Re-
public, 1788-1800. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Miller, John C. Crisis in Freedom: The Alien and Sedition Acts. Boston: Little,
Brown, 1951.
Sharp, James Roger. American Politics in the Early Republic: The New Nation in
Crisis. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1993.
See also Alien and Sedition Acts; Anti-Irish Riots of 1844; Irish immi-
grants; Irish immigrants and discrimination.
Filipino immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Philippines, an ar-
chipelago nation located across the China Sea from mainland Southeast
Asia
258
Filipino immigrants
Roadside stand of a fruit seller in San Lorenzo, California, during World War II. This picture was
taken in May, 1942—three months after President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive order
to intern all persons of Japanese descent living on the West Coast. At a moment of anti-Japanese
hysteria in California, Asian entrepreneurs such as this Filipino farmer advertised their non-
Japanese ethnic identities in order to do business safely. (National Archives)
Significance: Filipino Americans rank as the second-largest Asian American

group in the United States, after Chinese Americans, and substantial num-
bers of Filipino immigrants also live in a few parts of Canada. There are sev-
eral large Filipino American communities in California and Hawaii, and
Filipinos can be found throughout North America, often thoroughly inte-
grated into American neighborhoods and workplaces.
The Philippines has long had close ties to the United States because it was a
U.S. possession or territory from 1898 to 1946. The United States established
English as the language of instruction in high schools and colleges in the
Philippines, and Filipinos have long been familiar with American movies and
other media. Filipinos began settling in North America soon after the Philip-
259
Filipino immigrants
pines became part of the United States, and the numbers of Filipino Ameri-
cans began to increase greatly during the late 1960’s.
History of Filipino American Settlement Filipino settlement in North

America falls into three major periods. The first period, from 1906 to the be-
ginning of World War II in 1941, resulted from the U.S. demand for cheap ag-
ricultural labor. Sugar plantations dominated the economy of Hawaii early in
the twentieth century, and plantation owners were interested in finding hard-
working field hands who would work for low wages. The Hawaii Sugar Planters
Association began recruiting in the Philippines, and by 1946, the association
had brought more than a quarter of a million Filipinos to Hawaii. California,
which also had a need for seasonal agricultural workers, was the home of
more than thirty-one thousand of the forty-six thousand Filipinos living on
the mainland in 1940. Filipino Americans continue to make up part of the mi-
grant farm labor force of California and other western states, but the num-
bers of migrant Filipino workers are steadily decreasing.
The second migration period began in 1946, when the Philippines became
politically independent of the United States. Large U.S. military bases had
been established in the Philippines, and many of the Filipinos admitted to
the United States were women married to American servicemen. At the same
time, Filipinos who had become naturalized American citizens after the war
were able to petition to have family members enter the United States. Be-
cause of these two factors, most immigrants in this period came as a result of
marriage or family connections.
The United States maintained military bases in the Philippines until 1991,
Filipino farm workers. (Library of Congress)
260
Filipino immigrants
so Filipinos who married U.S. military personnel continued to arrive in the

United States. Another form of migration through marriage is the phenome-
non of mail-order brides, women who meet and marry American men through
correspondence. During the 1990’s, approximately nineteen thousand mail-
order brides were leaving the Philippines each year to join husbands and
fiancés abroad, with the United States as the primary destination. In 1997, so-
cial scientist Concepcion Montoya identified Filipina mail-order brides, who
often establish social networks among themselves, as a rapidly emerging
American community.
The third migration period began in 1965, when the United States passed
a new immigration law that ended the discrimination against Asians present
in all previous immigration laws. The result was a rapid growth in the Asian
American population in general and in the Filipino American population in
particular. The number of Filipinos living in the United States grew by
roughly 100 percent in each ten-year period from 1960 to 1990: from 176,000
in the census of 1960 to 343,000 in that of 1970, to 775,000 in 1980, to more
than 1,400,000 in the 1990 census. Between 1971 and 2003, new immigrants
entered the United States from the Philippines at an average of 45,000 per-
sons per year.
The third period of Filipino immigration differs greatly from the earlier
periods. Although immigrants before 1965 were mostly laborers from the ru-
ral Philippines, immigrants after 1965 tended to be highly educated profes-
sionals (such as doctors, nurses, teachers, and engineers), and they often
came from cities. Migration to the United States became a goal for many Fili-
pino professionals because economic opportunities were much greater in the
United States. During the 1970’s, one out of every five graduates of nursing
schools in the Philippines left for the United States, and the majority of those
nurses did not return to the Philippines. This may have created “brain drain”
problems for the Philippines, because it lost many of its medical profession-
als, executives, and technicians to the United States, but this migration has
been a benefit to the American economy. Filipino doctors and nurses are on
the staffs of many U.S. hospitals, and teachers from the Philippines are em-
ployed in many U.S. schools.
Filipinos in American Society By 1990, more than 1.4 million people in

the United States identified themselves as Filipino Americans. About 740,000
of these Filipino Americans lived in California, and 170,000 members of this
group lived in Hawaii. The Chicago area is also home to a fairly large number
of Filipinos.
Most Filipino Americans are immigrants. In 1990, of all Filipinos in the
United States, 64 percent were foreign-born and almost one-third had ar-
rived during the previous decade. Numbers of foreign-born Filipinos in-
creased even more during the 1990’s. From 1990 to March, 1997, according
to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the number of foreign-born Filipino Ameri-
cans grew from 913,723 to 1,132,000.
261
Filipino immigrants
Filipino Immigration to the United States,

1934-2003
60,000
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
1946
10,000 Philippine
independence
5,000
0
1934-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. Note that Filipino immigration before 1934 was regarded as insular.
Women outnumber men among foreign-born Filipinos, largely because

marriage to U.S. citizens has continued to be a major source of migration
from the Philippines. In 1990, women made up 57 percent of all foreign-born
Filipino Americans and almost 60 percent of foreign-born Filipino Ameri-
cans who had arrived during the 1980’s.
The fact that professionals, especially medical professionals, have been
such a large part of the third wave of immigrants has meant that many Fili-
pino Americans hold middle-class jobs. A majority of employed Filipinos in
the United States (55 percent) held white-collar jobs in 1990. Almost one out
of every four employed Filipino Americans over the age of sixteen worked in
health services. By contrast, fewer than one out of every ten employed Ameri-
262
Filipino immigrants
cans of all backgrounds worked in hospitals or in health-related jobs in that

year.
The professional specialization of so many Filipino Americans tends to
make them a relatively prosperous group. The median household income of
Filipino Americans in 1990 was $43,780, compared with $30,056 among
Americans in general. Further, although 10 percent of all American families
lived below the poverty level in 1990, only slightly more than 5 percent of Fili-
pino families in the United States lived in poverty.
Many Filipino Americans, especially the early agricultural laborers in Cali-
fornia, experienced discrimination. However, modern Filipinos usually re-
port relatively few problems in their relations with members of other racial
and ethnic groups. Familiarity with the English language and with main-
stream American culture, high levels of marriage with white and black Ameri-
cans, and a concentration in skilled occupations and white-collar professions
tend to help Filipino Americans in interethnic relations.
One reflection of the high degree of integration of Filipino Americans
into American society is the high percentage of foreign-born Filipino Ameri-
cans who take on U.S. citizenship. More than one-fourth of the Filipinos who
arrived in the United States during the 1980’s had been naturalized as citi-
zens by 1990. More than 80 percent of those who had arrived before 1980 had
become citizens. By contrast, fewer than 15 percent of all people who had im-
migrated to the United States during the 1980’s had become citizens, and
only 61 percent of foreign-born people who had immigrated before 1980 had
become citizens.
Further Reading For broad surveys of Filipino American history and

communities, see Veltisezar B. Bautista’s The Filipino Americans: From 1763 to
the Present—Their History, Culture, and Traditions (Farmington Hills, Mich.:
Bookhaus, 1998) and Barbara Mercedes Posadas’s The Filipino Americans
(Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1999). Yen Le Espiritu’s Filipino Ameri-
can Lives (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995) presents the narra-
tives of thirteen Filipino Americans who tell the stories of their lives. Filipino
Americans: Transformation and Identity (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publica-
tions, 1997), edited by Maria P. P. Root, is a collection of essays that consider
immigration from the Philippines to the United States, Filipino American
communities and community institutions, mixed-heritage Filipino Ameri-
cans, and Filipina mail-order brides in the United States. Luciano Mangiafi-
co’s Contemporary American Immigrants: Patterns of Filipino, Korean, and Chinese
Settlement in the United States (New York: Praeger, 1988) describes major waves
of migration, locations of large communities of these three ethnic groups,
and contemporary social conditions of the groups. Michel S. Laguerre’s The
Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manilatown in American Society
(New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999) is a study of Asian ethnic enclaves that
263
Filipino immigrants and family customs
considers Filipino communities. For a more general study of Asian immi-

grants, see Uma Anand Segal’s A Framework for Immigration: Asians in the United
States (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), which survey the history
and economic and social conditions of Asian immigrants, both before and af-
ter the federal immigration reforms of 1965.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Censuses, U.S.; Filipino immigrants

and family customs; Hawaiian and Pacific islander immigrants; Mail-order
brides; Refugee fatigue.
Filipino immigrants and

family customs
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Families and marriage
Significance: Immigrants of Filipino ancestry have a number of distinctive

values and customs regarding family, and there are large Filipino popula-
tions in the United States and Canada.
By 1990 there were more than 1.4 million people identifying themselves as
Filipinos in the United States and an estimated 127,000 in Canada. Both
countries experienced a continuous flow of immigrants from the Philippines
from the 1970’s through the 1990’s. About 40,000 entered the U.S. and about
6,500 entered Canada each year. Although Filipinos lived in all parts of the
United States, Southern California and Hawaii were home to large, concen-
trated Filipino communities. About 740,000 members of this group lived in
California and another 170,000 lived in Hawaii. More than half of all Cana-
dian Filipinos lived in Ontario, primarily in Toronto. The large numbers of
Filipinos, the continuing flow of new arrivals, and the existence of large eth-
nic communities all helped to maintain distinctive Filipino American family
customs. In general, Filipino American families who live in areas where there
are few other people from the Philippines retain few distinctive family charac-
teristics. In the large Filipino concentrations, such as Los Angeles, continual
contact among Filipinos has helped members maintain cultural continuity.
Cultural Values and Family Relations Four widely recognized key

cultural values guide Filipino family relations and family customs. These are
utang na loob (moral debt), hiya (shame), amor proprio (self-esteem), and
pakikisama (getting along with others). Children, from the Filipino perspec-
tive, owe an eternal debt to their parents, who gave them life. Children are
264
therefore expected to show obedience and respect to parents and grandpar-

ents.
The cultural value hiya dictates that individuals feel ashamed when they
fail to behave according to expected social roles, which are often thought of
in terms of family relations even when they involve people who are not actu-
ally family members. Younger people are expected to show respect for their
elders at all times. When children greet an older person, such as a grandpar-
ent, they show respect by taking the elder’s hand and bowing slightly to touch
the back of the hand with the forehead.
Older brothers and sisters are not to be treated as equals but are addressed
as kuya (“big brother”) and ate (“big sister”). Moreover, older friends are of-
ten called kuya or ate. Children call unrelated adults tita (“aunt”) or tito (“un-
cle”). People who do not seem to recognize or care about these types of social
relations may be referred to as walang hiya (“shameless”), a term that ex-
presses very strong disapproval.
Even when people violate social expectations, others will be reluctant to
criticize them openly out of fear of offending their sense of amor proprio. Criti-
cisms must be indirect, and they depend on individuals’ own sense of shame.
Pakikisama, or getting along with others, dictates that people avoid direct con-
frontation. In terms of the family, it also means that individuals should always
place the interests of the family and the maintenance of relations within the
family first and consider their own interests and desires as secondary.
In respect to these customs and values, life in North America has often led
to tension within Filipino families. Children raised in the United States, for
example, sometimes feel that it is humiliating to place the hands of elders
against their foreheads. Adults, in turn, feel frustrated if children refuse to
follow accepted customs, and they sometimes see their children as rude or
even walang hiya. Young people exposed to American ideas of individualism
also find it difficult to place the interests of the family before their own, which
parents may find disturbing.
Baptism and Sponsors Godparents or sponsors are virtual members of

Filipino families, a cultural practice known as compadrazgo. When children are
due to be baptized into the Roman Catholic Church, mothers and fathers ask
a number of men and women to stand as sponsors or godparents for their
children. Two of the sponsors are recognized by the Church as the children’s
godparents, but Filipinos rarely distinguish between these two primary spon-
sors and the other secondary sponsors; all are referred to as the children’s
ninongs, if they are men, and ninangs, if they are women. Sponsors are re-
garded as being close to additional parents, and they are expected to help the
children in any way they can. They give the children presents on birthdays
and other major occasions and they play key roles in baptisms, religious con-
firmation, and wedding ceremonies.
Since sponsors have an obligation to help children, people in the Philip-
pines often seek out powerful or influential persons to play this role. In the
265
United States and Canada, however, it is much more common for close
friends to act as sponsors, creating formal, customary ties among people
who refer to each other as compadre or copare and comadre or comare (literally
“co-father” and “co-mother”). Friends, even if they are not actually sponsors
of one another’s children, often shorten these terms and address each other
simply as pare or mare.
Wedding Customs Since the majority of Filipino Americans are Roman

Catholics, the Roman Catholic Church is usually central to wedding ceremo-
nies. Even when Filipinos marry in civil ceremonies, they almost always get
married again in the church. In the Philippines, grooms’ families tradition-
ally pay all wedding expenses. Some Filipino families native to the United
States or Canada have adopted the North American custom in which brides’
families pay wedding expenses, but most either continue to follow Filipino
ways or compromise and share costs.
Weddings in the Philippines, especially in the countryside, are often lavish
events in which families spend far beyond their means providing food and en-
tertainment for large numbers of guests. Filipino Americans rarely go to
these extremes, however, and most restrict their guest lists to friends and rela-
tives. Nevertheless, food remains an important part of wedding ceremonies,
and guests at Filipino American marriages can expect to find a large array of
Filipino dishes.
Wedding rites among Filipino Americans often retain many Spanish Cath-
olic customs not seen in other North American Catholic weddings. During
weddings in which couples adhere strictly to Filipino traditions, bridegrooms
give brides silver coins, known as aras, which symbolize wives’ control of
household finances. This type of traditional wedding includes the brides’ and
grooms’ sponsors as well as the maid of honor and the best man. One set of
sponsors holds the veil, one holds a rope, and one holds a candle. Brides wear
gowns that are very similar to those worn in other American weddings, but in-
stead of tuxedos grooms and the best man may wear the barong tagalog, the
formal Filipino shirt.
Further Reading
Almirol, Edwin B. Ethnic Identity and Social Negotiation: A Study of a Filipino Com-
munity in California. New York: AMS Press, 1985.
Bandon, Alexandra. Filipino Americans. New York: New Discovery Books, 1993.
Bautista, Veltisezar B. The Filipino Americans: From 1763 to the Present—Their
History, Culture, and Traditions. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Bookhaus, 1998.
Espiritu, Yen Le. Filipino American Lives. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press, 1995.
____________. Home Bound: Filipino American Lives Across Cultures, Commu-
nities, and Countries. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.
266
Florida illegal-immigrant suit
Laguerre, Michel S. The Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manila-

town in American Society. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999.
Mangiafico, Luciano. Contemporary American Immigrants: Patterns of Filipino,
Korean, and Chinese Settlement in the United States. New York: Praeger, 1988.
Posadas, Barbara Mercedes. The Filipino Americans. Westport, Conn.: Green-
wood Press, 1999.
Root, Maria P. P. Filipino Americans: Transformation and Identity. Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1997.
grants in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Censuses, U.S.; Filipino immigrants;

Hawaiian and Pacific islander immigrants; Mail-order brides; Refugee fa-
tigue.
Florida illegal-immigrant
suit
The Event: Florida state lawsuit against the federal government demanding
restitution for state expenditures on illegal immigrants, who were princi-
pally from Cuba
Date: April 11, 1994
Place: Miami, Florida
Immigration issues: Border control; Cuban immigrants
Significance: Although the state’s lawsuit was ultimately unsuccessful, it

helped to focus national attention on the inadequacy of federal funding of
the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
After claiming that illegal immigration to Florida was out of control, Gover-
nor Lawton M. Chiles, Jr., filed a lawsuit against the federal government de-
manding more than $884 million reimbursement for education, health, and
prison expenditures incurred by the state of Florida. These expenses were re-
lated to illegal aliens who entered the state during 1993. To emphasize the se-
rious economic pressures on local governments caused by illegal immigra-
tion, both the Dade County Public Health Trust and the county’s school
board joined Governor Chiles as plaintiffs in the suit. The lawsuit named as
defendants commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) Doris Meissner and U.S. attorney general Janet Reno, along with re-
gional and district officials of the INS.
The complaint was filed on April 11, 1994, as Chiles v. United States. It al-
267
leged that the federal government, through the defendants and their pre-
decessors, had since before 1980 “abdicated its responsibility under the im-
migration laws and the Constitution to enforce and administer rational
immigration policies.” The suit also pointed out that, according to the INS’s
own figures, at least 345,000 undocumented aliens resided in Florida in 1991.
That number constituted at least 36 percent of all immigrants in the state.
The lawsuit stated that Florida is a victim of an ongoing immigration emer-
gency that endangers the lives, property, safety, and economic welfare of the
residents of the state.
On December 20, 1994, Federal District Judge Edward B. Davis threw out
the lawsuit. In his decision, Davis said that he recognized the financial burden
to Florida resulting from “the methods in which the Federal Government has
chosen to enforce the immigration laws” but ruled that this did not give the
state the right to recover money. He concurred instead with the federal gov-
ernment’s argument that the case represented a political rather than a legal
question over “the proper allocation of Federal resources and the execution
of discretionary policies” dealing with immigration.
A National Immigration Crisis? In November, 1994, Governor Chiles

faced a reelection campaign in a state in which much of the electorate was
tired of successive waves of refugees from Cuba and Haiti. Political consider-
ations were important in his decision to file the lawsuit early in the campaign
year.
Judge Davis, in denying the suit, admitted that Florida faced “a Hobson’s
choice.” His written decision stated that if Florida chose not to provide ser-
vices to illegal aliens, including closing schools, emergency rooms, and other
service providers, the impact on the health, safety, and welfare of its citizenry
could be devastating. If, on the other hand, Florida chose to provide the ser-
vices, the costs could cripple the state.
In the meantime, Governor Chiles’s lawsuit and other pressures pushed
the Bill Clinton administration to ask Congress later that year for $350 mil-
lion to help governors pay the costs of imprisoning illegal aliens convicted of
felonies. In November, 1994, Attorney General Reno and INS commissioner
Meissner promised a 40 percent increase in border patrol resources along the
Mexico-U.S. border within the next six months.
Such moves were clearly in response to the popular perception—in the
other politically powerful border states of Texas and California as well as in
Florida—that the federal government was not meeting its responsibility for
controlling immigration. Many citizens were concerned that illegal immigra-
tion diminished the number of jobs available in an already tight job market.
California’s Proposition 187, a ballot initiative passed by a large majority in
November, 1994, threatened to cut off most public services to illegal immi-
grants. These services, according to Governor Pete Wilson of California
amounted to more than $3 billion annually in a state with increasingly serious
budget problems.
268
More than simple economics was at work. Both the Florida lawsuit and Cal-
ifornia’s Proposition 187 reflected a growing public backlash against large
numbers of illegal immigrants and perhaps even against the relatively high
rate of legal immigration. Not only was Chiles reelected in Florida, but Wil-
son also was re-elected, by a substantial margin. Most observers attributed
Wilson’s margin of victory in large part to his tough stance on illegal immi-
gration. Some immigrant-rights advocates accused Wilson of pandering to ra-
cial and ethnic divisions in a state with the highest unemployment rate in the
country.
Consequences Illegal immigration clearly remains a politically volatile issue.

During the year following Florida’s unsuccessful lawsuit, a new Republican-
controlled Congress gave evidence of responding to growing public concern
over illegal immigration. In March, 1995, House Speaker Newt Gingrich
formed a bipartisan task force to consider strategies to crack down on illegal
immigration. That same month, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, a
Democrat, assailed the Clinton administration for lax enforcement of immi-
gration laws. Political pressures indicated the likelihood of much larger ap-
propriations for INS enforcement of immigration laws.
Increased funding for the INS eventually materialized. The service’s 2001
budget was set at $4.8 billion—a figure roughly triple its 1994 budget.
Anthony D. Branch
Further Reading
Hernandez, Donald J., ed. Children of Immigrants: Health, Adjustment, and Pub-
lic Assistance. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999. Collection
of papers on issues of public health and welfare among immigrants to the
United States.
Levine, Robert M., and Moisés Asís. Cuban Miami. New Brunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers University Press, 2000. Broad study of Cuban immigrants in Mi-
ami, which is the center of the largest Cuban community in the United
States.
can Americans.
or Engagement? Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2005. Critical study of
changing U.S. policies toward Cuba.
See also Cuban immigrants; Cuban refugee policy; González rescue; Hai-
tian immigrants; Illegal aliens; Justice and immigration; Mariel boatlift; Prop-
osition 187.
269
Garment industry
Garment industry
Definition: Clothing-manufacturing businesses in urban centers
Immigration issues: Economics; Labor; Women
Significance: The decentralized structure of the garment industry, with its

small and medium-sized firms and varying degrees of labor specialization,
has always offered respectable but poorly paid wage labor for unskilled fe-
male workers, especially immigrants.
In 1818, two-thirds of all clothing in the United States was homemade. The
mechanization of the textile industry at the beginning of the nineteenth cen-
tury provided cheap cloth, which needed to be processed to be marketable.
The textile industry was therefore interested in speeding up the production
process through the mechanization of the garment industry and the creation
of a market of ready-made clothes. The introduction of the Singer sewing ma-
chine in 1852 and the mass production of paper patterns during the 1860’s
were stepping stones on the way to the ready-made industry.
Ready-made clothing was first produced for men, especially sailors, miners,
lumbermen, soldiers, and plantation owners, who demanded cheap clothing
for slaves. In the second half of the nineteenth century, a growing middle
class emerged, which increased the market for ready-to-wear men’s clothing.
The immigration of skilled and unskilled workers from southern and eastern
Europe beginning during the late nineteenth century provided the needed
labor force for the expansion of the garment industry. The market for ready-
made women’s clothing increased because of the growing number of women
in clerical and sales jobs, as well as in light manufacturing. In the first decade
of the twentieth century, the women’s garment industry expanded tremen-
dously, and, by 1914, the women’s clothing sector had surpassed that for
men’s clothing.
During the 1920’s, the garment industry lost importance as a result of
shifts in spending patterns away from clothing and toward personal transpor-
tation. Consequently, in search of cheap labor, manufacturers moved from
the unionized cities in the Northeast—such as New York City, Philadelphia,
Baltimore, and Chicago—to smaller Appalachian communities in Pennsylva-
nia as well as to Connecticut, the Southwest, and the Southeast. During the
1960’s, these so-called runaway shops started to go overseas, especially to
Southeast Asia. Chinese immigrants, Puerto Ricans, and other minority
groups continue to provide a cheap labor force in the sweatshops of the
American garment industry.
Gender Division of Labor in the Industry Before the mechanization

of the garment industry, men produced custom-made men’s clothing, while
270
Garment industry
women made cheap clothing for women and children. Men worked as skilled
tailors, while many women found work as seamstresses. Skilled female dress-
makers underwent a “deskilling” process during the modernization process
of the garment industry. Dressmakers became “operatives,” while male work-
ers could secure skilled work.
In the second half of the nineteenth century, the division of labor shifted
from the types of garments that were produced to the types of tasks that were
performed. During the 1870’s, male skilled and semiskilled workers invaded
the women’s clothing industry, which had been a predominantly female do-
main. Male tailors continued to perform the skilled tasks, such as pattern
making and cutting. The sewing machine opened the men’s clothing indus-
try for female workers, who found work as poorly paid finishers.
Seamstresses, who represented the majority of female garment workers,
did piecework for clothing manufacturers or contractors. They received pre-
cut garments and finished them in their homes. Seamstresses not only re-
ceived the lowest wages of all workers but also had to pay for rent, fuel, can-
dles, and even needles in order to do their work. Low wages were the result
of a huge labor supply: The seamstresses competed with prison labor, poor-
house labor, farmer’s wives and daughters, and church women’s sewing circles
who did not depend on this income.
Before 1880, Irish, English, German, and Swedish immigrant women
worked in the garment industry. Between 1880 and 1890, Jewish and Italian
immigrant women began to replace them. By 1890, about 40 percent of New
York City’s garment workers were Russian Jews and 27 percent came from
Southern Italy. In Chicago, Eastern Jews, Italians, Bohemians, Poles, Lithua-
nians, and Moravians worked in the garment industry. In 1911, a fire in the
Triangle Shirtwaist Company factory in New York City killed 146 garment
workers, most of them European immigrant women. The public outrage
caused by the tragedy led to the formation of the New York Factory Investiga-
tion Commission and paved the way for industrial regulations.
Unionization of the Garment Industry Before 1900, the unionization

of garment workers was mainly restricted to the organization of skilled male
workers in the craft unions. This situation changed as a result of the mili-
tancy of immigrant garment workers. One of the most famous chapters in the
history of immigrant women’s organizing is the “Uprising of the Twenty
Thousand.” In November, 1909, 20,000 New York City waistmakers (factory-
employed seamstresses) went on strike. The vast majority of the strikers were
Russian Jewish women, joined by Jewish men, Italian women, and native-born
women. Women became some of the most dedicated and idealistic partici-
pants in the labor movement. Militant and with a socialist background, they
helped to form the new unionism—labor unions that organized throughout
the industry.
The International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU) and the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers were the first unions to organize female
271
Garment industry
workers on a large scale and the first to employ women as organizers. Rose
Schneiderman was a socialist activist and union leader who fled the pogroms
in Russian Poland in 1891. She organized her first union in the United
States at the age of twenty-one and was the first female vice president of the
United Cloth Hat and Cap Makers Union. Schneiderman, an organizer of
the ILGWU, later became president of the National Women’s Trade Union
League (NWTUL), an alliance of immigrant women workers and upper-class
white women that was supporting women’s unionization and lobbying on be-
half of women’s concerns, such as protective legislation. Fannia Cohn, also an
organizer with the ILGWU, established the education department of the
union, which laid the cornerstone of workers’ education.
Silke Roth
Further Reading
Foundation, 1999.
Blicksilver, Jack. “Apparel and Other Textile Products.” In Manufacturing: A
Historiographical and Bibliographical Guide, edited by David O. Whitten and
Bessie E. Whitten. Vol. 1 in Handbook of American Business History. Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1990.
University Press, 2001.
Glenn, Susan A. Daughters of the Shtetl: Life and Labor in the Immigrant Genera-
tion. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1990.
Jensen, Joan M., and Sue Davidson, eds. A Needle, a Bobbin, a Strike: Women
Needleworkers in America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1984.
Karas, Jennifer. Bridges and Barriers: Earnings and Occupational Attainment
Among Immigrants. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2002.
Levine, Louis. The Women’s Garment Workers: A History of the International La-
dies’ Garment Workers’ Union. New York: B. W. Huebsch, 1924.
Waldinger, Roger, ed. Strangers at the Gates: New Immigrants in Urban America.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
See also Asian Indian immigrants; Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance;
Eastern European Jewish immigrants; Thai garment worker enslavement;
Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire; Women immigrants.
272
Generational acculturation
Generational
acculturation
Definition: Different degree and speed of changes in cultural patterns of
groups when two or more ethnic and racial groups interact over a series of
generations
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Japanese immigrants; Language;

Religion; Sociological theories
Significance: Although assimilation and acculturation are used inter-

changeably by sociologists and anthropologists, acculturation is a part of
the assimilation process.
Since its colonial period, America has received immigrants from all over the
world and created a mosaic of ethnic groups of various races, religions, and
national origins. However, Anglo-Saxons from England had the greatest im-
pact on American culture, particularly in American language, religion, and
cultural values. Many ethnic and racial groups have gone through voluntary
and involuntary acculturation processes over time to conform to this Anglo-
Saxon culture. Members of the second generation (children of foreign-born
parents) are more acculturated than their parents, and members of the third
generation (children of native-born parents) are more acculturated than
theirs. The concept of generational acculturation assumes that the foreign
cultures that immigrants bring with them will be attenuated over genera-
tions.
Generational Difference The first generation of many immigrant

groups established ethnic enclaves, such as Little Italies, Little Tokyos, China-
towns, and Jewish communities, and provided new immigrants of the same
national origin with elements of their old culture, including ethnic grocery
stores, cafés, and restaurants, and protection from societal hostility. First-
generation immigrants were able to function in their own ethnic enclaves
without speaking English and without changing their religious faith or cul-
tural values. These immigrants were structurally and culturally separated
from each other and from the core society, thus creating what scholar Horace
Kallen called “structural pluralism.”
Members of the second generation (American-born children) in gen-
eral, however, achieved English competence and acquired American values
through the public school system and the mass media. Because of societal
hostility toward immigrants who possessed cultural traits not derived from
Euro-American culture, native-born children, who witnessed their parents’
hardships, tended to abandon their parents’ culture. The second genera-
273
tion’s relinquishment of distinc-

tive cultural traits frequently cre-
ated a gap between them and their
parents, who retained the cultural
values of their nation of origin.
Linear Model Historians often

cite a theory of second-generation
rejection, as if there were iron-
clad laws that dictated the cultural
changes undergone by immigrant
children. Generational accultura-
tion tends to assume linear assim-
ilation of immigrants to the core
culture over generations. Members
of the third generation (American-
born children of American-born
parents) are more acculturated
than their parents. According to
this linear model of generational
acculturation, newer generations
will either eventually be absorbed
into Euro-American culture or con- This poster issued by the federal government during
tribute to creating the American World War II to remind Americans of the positive
melting pot. contributions made to the nation by immigrants
Since the 1960’s, scholars have draws upon the concept of the “melting pot”—one
frequently conducted research on of the underpinnings of generational acculturation.
Chinese and Japanese Americans (NARA)
to study generational differences
in acculturation processes. Unlike most European immigrants, the first gen-
erations of Chinese and Japanese entered the mainland of the United States
during a short and distinctive span of time; then immigration was blocked.
Chinese first entered the U.S. mainland as unskilled cheap labor during the
1850’s, and their immigration was blocked by the Chinese Exclusion Act in
1882. After the exclusion of Chinese, the demand for cheap labor attracted
the Japanese, and their immigration continued until it was restricted by the
Immigration Act of 1924. For both groups, the second generation was born
during a rather distinctive span of time, and even the third generation can be
fairly well defined by span of years of birth. The three generations were also
rather discrete birth cohorts and experienced distinctive acculturation pro-
cesses in the change of cultural and behavioral patterns, in integration with
whites, and in intermarriage with other racial and ethnic groups.
Nonlinear Model In 1952, scholar Marcus Lee Hansen described a re-

newed interest in ethnicity among members of the third generation: “What
274
the second generation tries to forget, the third generation tries to remem-
ber.” He argued that there may be internal social and psychological forces
rather than external social forces that explain the persistence of white ethnic-
ity. Members of the second generation, who observed the hardships that their
foreign-born parents had experienced, tended to de-emphasize their ethnic-
ity and cultural traits to avoid prejudice and discrimination from the larger
society. Hansen found that members of the third generation, who are more
acculturated in terms of English skills and American values and are free from
severe discrimination, try to reconnect with their grandparents and their eth-
nic roots.
Ethnogenesis theory, set forth by Andrew M. Greeley in Ethnicity in the
United States (1974), also argues that ethnic identity and acculturation are
situational. Although newer generations of immigrants share cultural traits
with the host group, they also retain distinctive characteristics. This process
of rejection and maintenance of original cultural traits is situational and con-
textual according to an ethnic group’s nationality, mode of entrance to the
United States, political and economic climate at the time of entrance, and a
host of other factors. Therefore, according to Greeley, acculturation is nei-
ther linear nor accelerated over generations.
Scholars during the late twentieth century criticized the linear accultura-
tion model, which assumed an Anglo-conformist perspective to analyze the
acculturation process of ethnic and racial minority groups. These scholars ar-
gue that acculturation of these groups was a forced and involuntary process
in order for them to be accepted as members of the host society. These pro-
cesses are reflected in the episodes of boarding schools for Native American
children, a different taxation system for Roman Catholics, prohibition of
Spanish in public education, and so forth.
Acculturation Process for Later Immigrants Generational accultur-

ation of immigrants since the late 1980’s is different from the patterns men-
tioned above. Recent immigrants tend to retain their distinctive cultural
traits over generations because of the emphasis on cultural diversity in the
workplace and in the educational system in American society. The motives be-
hind cultural maintenance are also related to the social class of recent immi-
grants. Immigrants who lack English skills retain their own language out of
necessity, but immigrants who possess English skills and high socioeconomic
status retain their language and culture out of desire. These immigrant par-
ents hope their children will become bilingual and bicultural—able to speak
two languages and live in two cultures. With an increasing number of immi-
grants expected in the twenty-first century and a continuing appreciation of
diversity, more and more immigrants are expected to retain their distinctive
cultural traits.
Hisako Matsuo
275
Gentlemen’s Agreement
Further Reading
Gordon, Milton. Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race, Religion, and Na-
tional Origins. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964. Seminal work that
remains the standard reference on the assimilation process.
Greeley, Andrew M. Ethnicity in the United States: A Preliminary Reconnaissance.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974. Exposition of Greeley’s ethnogenesis
theory, which argues that ethnic identity and acculturation are situational.
Hansen, Marcus Lee. “The Third Generation in America” Commentary 14
(1952). Presentation of Hansen’s theories on third-generation immigrants.
Kallen, Horace. Culture and Democracy in the United States. New York: Boni &
Liveright, 1924. Presents Kallen’s views on structural pluralism.
Matsuo, Hisako. “Identificational Assimilation of Japanese Americans: A Re-
assessment of Primordialism and Circumstantialism.” Sociological Perspec-
tives 35 (1992). Examination of the assimilation process among Japanese
Americans.
grants in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Collection
of papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants. In-
cludes chapters on Mexicans, Cubans, Central Americans, Filipinos, Viet-
namese, Haitians, and other West Indians.
Press of America, 2002. Survey of the cultural adjustments through which
new immigrants to the United States must go.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Collection of essays on ur-
ban aspects of immigration in the United States, particularly race rela-
tions, employment, and generational acculturation.
See also Assimilation theories; Ethnic enclaves; Hansen effect; Melting

pot.
The Treaty: Treaty between the United States and Japan that limited immi-
gration from Japan to the mainland United States to nonlaborers, laborers
already settled in the United States, and their families
Date: March 14, 1907
276
Place: United States and Japan
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Government and politics; Japanese

immigrants; Laws and treaties
Significance: As a consequence of this 1907 agreement between the U.S.

and Japanese governments, immigration from Japan to the mainland
United States was limited to nonlaborers, laborers already settled in the
United States, and their families.
The first Japanese immigrants who arrived in California in 1871 were mostly
middle-class young men seeking opportunities to study or improve their eco-
nomic status. By 1880, there were 148 resident Japanese. Their numbers
increased to 1,360 in 1891, including 281 laborers and 172 farmers. A treaty
between the United States and Japan in 1894 ensured mutual free entry al-
though allowing limitations on immigration based on domestic interests. By
1900, the number of Japanese recorded in the U.S. Census had increased to
24,326. They arrived at ports on the Pacific coast and settled primarily in the
Pacific states and British Columbia.
An increase in the demand for Hawaiian sugar in turn increased the de-
mand for plantation labor, especially Japanese labor. An era of government-
contract labor began in 1884, ending only with the U.S. annexation of Hawaii
in 1898. Sixty thousand Japanese in the islands then became eligible to enter
the United States without passports. Between 1899 and 1906, it is estimated
that between forty thousand and fifty-seven thousand Japanese moved to the
United States via Hawaii, Canada, and Mexico.
Tensions Develop On the Pacific coast, tensions developed between

Asians and other Californians. Although the Japanese immigrant workforce
was initially welcomed, antagonism increased as these immigrants began to
compete with U.S. labor. The emerging trade-union movement advocated a
restriction of immigration. An earlier campaign against the Chinese had cul-
minated in the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, which suspended immigration of
Chinese laborers to the United States for ten years. This act constituted the
first U.S. law barring immigration based on race or nationality. A similar cam-
paign was instigated against the Japanese. On March 1, 1905, both houses of
the California state legislature voted to urge California’s congressional dele-
gation in Washington, D.C., to pursue the limitation of Japanese immigrants.
At a meeting in San Francisco on May 7, delegates from sixty-seven organiza-
tions launched the Japanese and Korean Exclusion League, known also as the
Asiatic Exclusion League.
President Theodore Roosevelt, who was involved in the peace negotiations
between Japan and Russia, observed the developing situation in California.
George Kennan, who was covering the Russo-Japanese War, wrote to the presi-
dent:
277
It isn’t the exclusion of a few emigrants that hurts here . . . it’s the putting of Jap-
anese below Hungarians, Italians, Syrians, Polish Jews, and degraded nonde-
scripts from all parts of Europe and Western Asia. No proud, high spirited and
victorious people will submit to such a classification as that, especially when it is
made with insulting reference to personal character and habits.
Roosevelt agreed, saying he was mortified that people in the United States
should insult the Japanese. He continued to play a pivotal role in resolving
the Japanese-Russian differences at the Portsmouth Peace Conference.
Anti-Japanese feeling waned until April, 1906. Following the San Francisco
earthquake, an outbreak of crime occurred, including many cases of assault
against Japanese. There was also an organized boycott of Japanese restau-
rants. The Japanese viewed these acts as especially reprehensible. Their gov-
ernment and Red Cross had contributed more relief for San Francisco than
all other foreign nations combined.
Tension escalated. The Asiatic Exclusion League, whose membership was
estimated to be 78,500 in California, together with San Francisco’s mayor,
pressured the San Francisco school board to segregate Japanese schoolchil-
dren. On October 11, 1906, the board passed its resolution. A protest filed by
the Japanese consul was denied. Japan protested that the act violated most-
favored-nation treatment. Ambassador Luke E. Wright, in Tokyo, reported Ja-
pan’s extremely negative feelings about the matter to Secretary of State Elihu
Root. This crisis in Japanese American relations brought the countries to the
brink of war. On October 25, Ja-
pan’s ambassador, Shuzo Aoki, met
with Root to seek a solution. Presi-
dent Roosevelt, who recognized the
justification of the Japanese pro-
test based on the 1894 treaty, on
October 26 sent his secretary of
commerce and labor to San Fran-
cisco to investigate the matter.
In his message to Congress on
December 4, President Roosevelt
paid tribute to Japan and strongly
repudiated San Francisco for its anti-
Japanese acts. He encouraged Con-
gress to pass an act that would allow
naturalization of the Japanese in
the United States. Roosevelt’s state-
ments and request pleased Japan
but aroused further resentment on
the Pacific coast. During the previ-
President Theodore Roosevelt. (Library of Con- ous twelve months, more than sev-
gress) enteen thousand Japanese had en-
278
Japanese sugar plantation workers in Hawaii around 1890. (Hawaii State Archives)
tered the mainland United States, two-thirds coming by way of Hawaii.

Roosevelt recognized that the basic cause of the unrest in California—the in-
creasing inflow of Japanese laborers—could be resolved only by checking im-
migration.
U.S. and Japan Negotiate Negotiations with Japan to limit the entry of
Japanese laborers began in late December, 1906. Three issues were involved:
the rescinding of the segregation order by the San Francisco school board,
the withholding of passports to the mainland United States by the Japanese
government, and the closing of immigration channels through Hawaii, Can-
ada, and Mexico by federal legislation. The Hawaiian issue, which related to
an earlier Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1900, was the first resolved through the
diplomacy of Japan’s foreign minister, Tadasu Hayashi, ambassadors Wright
and Aoki, and Secretary of State Root.
Before Japan would agree to discuss immigration to the mainland, it was
necessary for the segregation order to be withdrawn. In February, 1907, the
president invited San Francisco’s entire board of education, the mayor, and a
city superintendent of schools to Washington, D.C., to confer on the segrega-
tion issue and other problems related to Japan. On February 18, a pending
immigration bill was amended to prevent Japanese laborers from entering
the United States via Hawaii, Mexico, or Canada. Assured that immigration of
Japanese laborers would be stopped, the school board rescinded their segre-
279
gation order on March 13. An executive order issued by the president on

March 14 put into effect the restrictions on passports. Subsequently, the Japa-
nese government agreed to conclude the Gentlemen’s Agreement. In Janu-
ary, 1908, Foreign Minister Hayashi agreed to the terms of immigration dis-
cussed in December, 1907. On March 9, Secretary of State Root instructed
Ambassador Wright to thank Japan, thus concluding the negotiations begun
in December, 1906.
As reported by the commissioner general of immigration in 1908, the Japa-
nese government would issue passports for travel to the continental United
States only to nonlaborers; laborers who were former residents of the United
States; parents, wives, or children of residents; and “settled agriculturalists.” A
final provision prevented secondary immigration into the United States by
way of Hawaii, Mexico, or Canada.
When the Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1907 cut off new supplies of Japa-
nese labor, Filipinos were recruited to take their place, both in Hawaii and in
California, as well as in the Alaskan fishing industry. As U.S. nationals, Filipi-
nos could not be prevented from migrating to the United States.
Susan E. Hamilton
Further Reading
Esthus, Raymond A. Theodore Roosevelt and Japan. Seattle: University of Wash-
ington Press, 1967. Extensive, detailed examination of President Theo-
dore Roosevelt’s relationship with Japan.
Kikumura, Akemi. Issei Pioneers: Hawaii and the Mainland, 1885 to 1924. Los
Angeles: Japanese American National Museum, 1992. Brief but well-
researched text, with photographs that accompanied the premiere exhibit
of the Japanese American National Museum.
wood Press, 1999. Comprehensive history of American immigration policy.
United States Department of State. Report of the Hon. Roland S. Morris on Japa-
nese Immigration and Alleged Discriminatory Legislation Against Japanese Resi-
dents in the United States. 1921. Reprint. New York: Arno Press, 1978. Con-
temporary correspondence relating to the Gentlemen’s Agreement.
See also Alien land laws; Border Patrol, U.S.; History of U.S. immigration;
Immigration Act of 1921; Japanese immigrants; Japanese segregation in Cali-
fornia schools; Picture brides; Women immigrants; “Yellow peril” campaign.
280
German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s
German and Irish

immigration of the 1840’s
The Event: Period during which more than one million Germans and Irish
immigrated to the United States
Date: 1840’s
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Irish immigrants; Nativism and

racism
Significance: The years before the Civil War, during which there was an in-
flux of Germans and Irish into the United States, was one of the most sig-
nificant periods in U.S. immigration history.
Of the 31,500,000 persons counted in the 1840 U.S. Census, 4,736,000 were
of foreign birth. That year’s census also showed that the greatest number
of immigrants had come from two countries: 1,611,000 from Ireland and
1,301,000 from Germany (principally from the southwestern states of Würt-
temberg, Baden, and Bavaria). The migration, which had gained momentum
in the years following the Napoleonic Wars, reached large numbers by the
1840’s and grew dramatically during the 1850’s, when more than one million
Germans and Irish came to the United States. The Crimean War, the Panic of
1857, and the Civil War were among the events that brought an end to this
wave of immigration.
When seen in broad perspective, the migration reflected the process of
economic and social change that had gathered force in the period of peace
after 1815. The rapid increase in the population of Europe served to magnify
the evils that the factory system had brought about by displacing old societal
patterns and swelling the army of paupers. Of far greater importance at the
time, however, was the disruption of life for the agricultural masses. In Ire-
land, population pressures had led to a continuing subdivision of land and to
a structure of paying rent to absentee landowners that amounted to eco-
nomic persecution.
The remarkably fecund potato made this complex system possible, but
events would soon uncover its tragic limitations. Dependence on the potato
was not as great in southwestern Germany, but the process of subdividing the
land there had grown considerably. Moreover, the encumbrance of ancient
tithes and dues was compounded by a web of mortgages, as debts were in-
curred to improve farming practices. In both countries, tenant farmers con-
stituted the bulk of emigrants before the 1840’s. Yet their departure, inspired
chiefly by the fear of losing status and not by immediate need, revealed that a
long-run process of adjustment was in the making.
The potato famine precipitated this process. The blight began in 1845 and
281
assumed devastating proportions by the following year. Untold suffering and

death marked the movement of the Irish to the coast, where ship fever took
its toll in 1847. Although the potato famine extended to Germany, there was
less actual misery in the country. The rumor that the United States was about
to close its gates, however, created a situation approaching panic among the
many who were desperately seeking to emigrate before it was too late. The
great exodus enabled a process of land consolidation to begin; consolidation,
in turn, stimulated further emigration after the famine had passed. Repres-
sion in the wake of Europe’s Revolution of 1848 also added political exiles to
the tide of migration from Germany, but their numbers were small. The over-
whelming mass of people were driven by economic, rather than political,
forces.
Patterns of commerce that had developed between North America and Eu-
rope made cheap transportation available and helped to determine the way
the newcomers settled in the United States. Irish immigrants came by two ma-
jor routes. Ships carrying timber from Canada to Ireland made the return
trip with cargoes of emigrants, most of whom then began the trek southward
to New England. Another route lay through Liverpool, where the cotton
ships from Southern ports returned to Boston and New York. Once in the
new land, the mostly unskilled Irish took whatever jobs were available. It was
common for male immigrants to start in canal and railroad construction and
then move into the mill towns to take on more permanent work in large ur-
ban areas.
Among the unique aspects of Irish immigration in the nineteenth century
was that more women emigrated than men; thus, there were more Irish
women than men in the United States throughout the century. Although fe-
male Irish immigrants have often been stereotyped as maids, they worked in
many of the same occupations as other U.S. women in the nineteenth century
and were often able to see their daughters move into higher-paying or more
prestigious positions, such as that of schoolteacher.
Germans, on the other hand, were unique because of the large number of
family groups that emigrated. Approximately two-thirds of the Germans who
emigrated came as family groups. The first large group of German Jews came
during the 1840’s, as thousands fled social and economic persecution in Ba-
varia. The Germans, like the Irish, came by two basic routes, but greater diffu-
sion and diversity characterized their settlement. Many chose to stay in the
East, while others moved westward along the Erie Canal through Buffalo and
out to Ohio. By the 1840’s, a larger contingent came to New Orleans on the
cotton ships from Le Havre. Some remained in the South, notably in Texas,
but the majority of German immigrants moved to the valleys of the Upper
Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. There, as in the East, they brought a range of
craft and professional skills into the urban centers. The vast number who set-
tled on the land, meanwhile, generally preferred to buy farms already cleared
by earlier settlers.
The reception of the newcomers was somewhat mixed. The abundance
282
of space and the ideal of asylum generally tended to make the reception of
immigrants favorable. Persons of influence, such as Governor William H.
Seward of New York, added to this positive viewpoint by recognizing the con-
tributions that immigrants had made to the development of the country. Op-
position arose on several grounds, however. The influx of immigrants un-
doubtedly increased the problems of crime, poverty, unemployment, and
disease, particularly in large urban areas. Bloc voting and the fear of political
radicalism made many fear the newcomers.
The different customs of the Irish and Germans, such as German beer gar-
dens and Irish wakes, offended many Americans. The belief that there was a
papal plot among Irish and German Catholics to subvert Protestantism and
democracy provided the greatest focus to nativist sentiments. During the
1850’s, a nativist movement known as the Know-Nothings attempted to har-
ness such feelings; its timing and rapid demise reflected less a fear of foreign
influences than the internal tensions engendered by the conflict of slavery
and the disruption of the Whig Party. Few people in the United States called
for anything more than closing the gate on any undesirable immigrants, and
the lengthening of the probationary period of citizenship from five to twenty-
one years.
The significance of German and Irish immigration in the two decades
prior to the Civil War lies in the cultural diversity they gave to the United
States and the assistance they gave to the building of their new country.
Major L. Wilson
Judith Boyce DeMark
Further Reading
Clark, Dennis. Hibernia America: The Irish and Regional Cultures. Contributions
in Ethnic Studies 14. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1986. Discusses
the Irish in the United States from the colonial era through the nineteenth
century, with emphasis on the push/pull factors of immigration.
Diner, Hasia. Erin’s Daughters in America: Irish Immigrant Women in the Nine-
teenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983. Well-
balanced portrayal of Irish immigrant women, describing their lives in Ire-
land and their successes and failures in the United States.
with an emphasis on cultural and social trends and attention to ethnic con-
flicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
283
German immigrants
Griffin, William D. A Portrait of the Irish in America. New York: Charles Scrib-
ner’s Sons, 1981. Photographic essay of Irish immigration, with detailed
captions. Includes an introductory text with many drawings and photo-
graphs from the nineteenth century.
Levine, Bruce. The Spirit of 1848: German Immigrants, Labor Conflict, and the
Coming of the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992. Discusses
the relationship of Germans in Europe and the United States. Compares
the Revolutions of 1848 and the American land debates that led to war.
Paulson, Timothy J. Irish Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005. Brief sur-
vey of Irish immigrant history for young adult readers.
Rippley, LaVern J. The German-Americans. Boston: Twayne, 1976. Focuses on
Germans in the United States in the nineteenth century. Discusses Ger-
man American contributions to U.S. culture.
See also Anti-Irish Riots of 1844; Celtic Irish; European immigrants, 1790-
1892; German immigrants; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants and African
Americans; Irish immigrants and discrimination; Irish stereotypes; Scotch-
Irish immigrants.
German immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Germany
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants; Native Ameri-

cans
Significance: Since the early nineteenth century, German Americans have

constituted a major ethnic group in the United States. These early immi-
grants—Roman Catholic, Protestant, Separatist, and Jewish—assimilated
relatively easily and completely and dispersed throughout the country. In
contrast to other immigrant groups, such as the Irish, Italians, and Poles,
few negative characteristics were attributed to Germans.
The first German colony was established in Germantown, Pennsylvania, in

1683 by Mennonites, an Anabaptist sect. (The Amish later separated from the
Mennonites.) However, individual Germans were already present in the En-
284
German immigrants
German emigrants embarking for the United States at the port of Hamburg. (National Archives)
glish colonies and in the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam. The Hutterites,
another Anabaptist sect, came to America in 1874, settling in South Dakota.
Although pacifists, they were subjected to conscription during World War I.
Most of the community migrated to Canada, but many later returned. Two
Hutterites who were sentenced for refusing conscription died from maltreat-
ment.
Methodism developed a following among German Americans in the nine-
teenth century, and although the Methodist Church began phasing out the
German branch in 1924, some congregations of the German Methodist
Church persisted throughout the twentieth century. Germans also set up Bap-
tist and Presbyterian Churches. By 1890, nearly half of German Americans
were Roman Catholic. Catholics and Lutherans did not mix much, which
tended to divide German American political influence. The German and
Irish wings of the American Catholic Church experienced some conflict dur-
ing the 1880’s and 1890’s, and before World War I, German, Irish, and Polish
congregations attended separate Catholic churches. Similarly, German and
Scandinavian congregations often established separate Lutheran churches,
and German American and eastern European Jews generally formed sepa-
rate worship groups, although the eastern European Jews commonly spoke
Yiddish, which is more than 80 percent German. German American Jews
maintained cultural ties with Germany until the Nazi period.
285
German immigrants
Relations with American Indians The Germans seemed to have less

trouble with American Indians than other settlers in the eighteenth century,
and in Texas, where thriving German settlements were established during the
1830’s and 1840’s, the Meusenbach-Comanche Treaty of 1847, negotiated be-
tween John Meusenbach and Comanche leaders Buffalo Hump, Santana,
and Old Owl, was never broken by either side.
Two German travelers and a German American made significant contribu-
tions to American Indian ethnology. Alexander Philipp Maximilian, Prince of
Wied-Neuwied, visited the United States in 1832 and produced a comprehen-
sive study of the Mandan tribe, which later became extinct. Friedrich Ger-
stäcker, who visited the United States from 1837 to 1843 and again in 1849
and 1867, created a detailed ethnography of American Indian culture. Ger-
man American Gustavus Sohon, born in Prussia, served in the U.S. Army as a
surveyor in the Northwest. There he became familiar with several American
Indian tribes along the Columbia River and made numerous sketches of their
lives, which are a valuable part of the anthropological record.
German Americans and Slavery Various German American groups

spoke out against slavery in the United States. The Mennonites of German-
town, Pennsylvania, made the first protest in 1688. The Salzburger Protestant
colony of Ebenezer in Georgia, founded in 1734, also opposed slavery.
The failed Revolution of 1848, during which reactionary authorities in
Berlin and Vienna suppressed attempts at constitutional reform, resulted in
thousands of liberal intellectuals migrating to the United States. These new
immigrants, who were particularly active in establishing newspapers, had a
major impact on the cultural life of German American communities. The
Forty-eighters, as they were known, were strongly opposed to slavery, and un-
der their influence, a strong alliance formed between abolitionist forces and
the German press in the United States.
Among the Forty-eighters was Mathilde Franziska Anneke-Giesler, an early
champion of women’s rights who came to the United States in 1850. Al-
though she wrote almost exclusively in German, she was in close contact with
suffragists Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and often lectured
in English. Antagonism to her feminist and antislavery attitudes caused her to
go to England in 1860, where she lectured against slavery, returning to the
United States in 1865.
In 1854, Germans meeting in San Antonio, Texas, declared their opposi-
tion to slavery, and German Americans fought on the North’s side during the
Civil War. In a battle with Confederate soldiers, one German American guard
of sixty-five men lost twenty-seven people and had nine of its wounded mur-
dered by opposition forces.
Relations with Anglo-Saxon Society During the early nineteenth cen-

tury, the German community in New York was significant enough to be
courted by both political parties. A German Democratic Party organization
286
German immigrants
was created in 1834, and eventually a German language newspaper was estab-
lished to reflect the party’s platform.
The years before the Civil War saw the rise of nativism, and anti-Catholicism
was rampant. In 1855, murderous rioters in Louisville, Kentucky, attacked
German Americans because many of them were Catholic and foreign-born
and tended to be politically radical. The German Americans’ opposition to
slavery also created hostility in several regions.
German Americans experienced some friction with Anglo-Saxon Protes-
tants of a puritanical bent, who disdained frivolity, especially on Sunday, and
disliked some German customs associated with Christmas because they ap-
peared to be pagan in origin. This immigrant group also clashed with the
growing temperance movement in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
The breweries founded by Germans in cities such as Cincinnati, Ohio; Mil-
waukee, Wisconsin; and St. Louis, Missouri, contributed to the economic de-
velopment of these cities, and German Americans largely controlled the
American brewing industry.
German Americans in Texas kept that state from becoming a dry state un-
til national Prohibition went into effect. One of the major purposes of the
German American Alliance was to oppose Prohibition. The German Ameri-
can Alliance (Deutsch-Amerikanische Nationalbund) was formed in 1901 as
a national, sectarian, politically nonpartisan German American organization.
German immigrants celebrating at a folklore festival in Washington, D.C . The slogan on the ban-
ner translates as “A Toast, a toast to happiness: One, two, three, drink up!” (Smithsonian Institution)
287
German immigrants
German Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
150,000
140,000
130,000
120,000
110,000 Revolution
100,000 of 1848 1914-1918

World War I
90,000
80,000 1933-1945
Nazi government
70,000
1939-1945
60,000
World War II
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
It reached a membership of three million by 1916 to become the largest eth-

nic organization in U.S. history. Congress abrogated the organization’s char-
ter in 1918. Germans were also active in the labor movement that began after
the Civil War and in radical politics, which caused some conflict with the dom-
inant society.
World War I U.S. entry into World War I unleashed a tremendous irratio-
nal hostility toward anything German, including music—not just folk or pop-
ular music but classical music and opera. German Americans were harassed
and subjected to physical assault, vandalism, and even murder. This hysteria
existed even in areas where German Americans constituted more than one-
third of the population or even a majority.
Laws in various states forbade teaching German in schools and speaking
German in public, and thousands were convicted. Such laws were declared un-
constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1923. Anti-German attitudes lin-
288
German immigrants
gered for a few years after the war and accelerated Anglicization of churches,
social organizations, and newspapers.
World War II In 1936, the Deutschamerikanische Volksbund, the German

American Bund, replaced an earlier organization intended to represent the
Nazi Party in the United States. The membership was believed to be only sixty-
five hundred, and 40 percent were not actually of German stock, but the orga-
nization’s posturing, arrogance, and hostility in effect mobilized public opin-
ion against the Nazis and complicated diplomatic relations between the United
States and Germany. The Steuben Society, the most prestigious German
American organization, and other German organizations felt it necessary to
repudiate the Bund, and German American antifascist organizations were
formed.
After World War II, German American ethnic identity became increasingly
tenuous as the population moved to the suburbs, and changes in recreational
tastes weakened ties to German culture. Postwar German immigrants were
less inclined to take part in German cultural organizations.
In 1948, the Russian blockade of the land routes to West Berlin made that
city, and by extension West Germany, a symbol of freedom and democracy,
giving Americans a more positive attitude toward Germany. West Germany
became a military ally, and during the second half of the century, became in-
creasingly integrated into the pan-European identity of the European Union.
Similarly, German Americans came to identify more with the broader Euro-
pean American culture.
William L. Reinshagen
Further Reading Victor R. Greene’s A Singing Ambivalence: American Im-

migrants Between Old World and New, 1830-1930 (Kent, Ohio: Kent State Uni-
versity Press, 2004) is a comparative study of challenges faced by members
of eight major immigrant groups including Germans. LaVern Ripley’s The
German-Americans (Boston: Twayne, 1976) is a well-written history of Germans
in the United States from colonial times to the U.S. Bicentennial, explaining
contemporaneous events in German Europe and mentioning prominent
German Americans. Alfred Llau’s Deutschland––United States of America, 1683-
1983 (Bielefeld, Germany: Univers-Verlag, 1983) covers three hundred years
of immigration and German-American relations. Gerard Wilk’s Americans
from Germany (New York: German Information Center, 1976) focuses particu-
larly on the experiences of German Americans over the years, and Irene M.
Franck’s The German American Heritage (New York: Facts On File, 1988) pro-
vides details and statistical information. German Culture in Texas, edited by
Glen E. Lich and Dona B. Reeves (Boston: Twayne, 1980), is a collection of ar-
ticles on various aspects of the German regions of Texas. The University of
Wisconsin publishes The Yearbook of German American Studies and annotated
bibliographies.
289
González rescue
See also Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants; English-only and of-
ficial English movements; Euro-Americans; European immigrants, 1790-1892;
German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; Jewish immigrants; War brides;
War Brides Act.
González rescue
The Event: Rescue of Elián González, a young Cuban boy who survived the
sinking of a refugee boat off the coast of Florida
Date: November 25, 1999
Immigration issues: Border control; Cuban immigrants; Families and mar-

riage; West Indian immigrants
Significance: González’s rescue and transportation to Florida touched off a

long battle between his relatives in Miami and his father in Cuba that influ-
enced U.S. immigration policy and altered American images of Cuban
Americans and their place in American society.
On November 22, 1999, a five-year-old Cuban boy named Elián González and
thirteen other Cubans left Cardenas, Cuba, bound for the United States on a
sixteen-foot motorboat. At 10 p.m., their boat capsized and Elián’s mother,
Elizabeth Brotons, and at least ten other passengers drowned. Three days
later, Elián was found floating on an inner tube three miles from Ft. Lauder-
dale, Florida, and was taken to Hollywood Regional Medical Center. He was
later released to his great-uncle, Lázaro González, by the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) until his immigration status could be deter-
mined.
Lázaro González and Elián’s cousin Marisleysis González wanted to keep
the boy in the United States, but Elián’s father, Juan Miguel González, de-
manded that the boy be returned to him in Cuba. After González and his wife
had divorced, Elián had lived with his mother, although the father, who had
remarried, maintained a relationship with the boy. González believed that he
had the right to claim his son, who was allegedly taken out of Cuba without his
knowledge. Elián’s stateside relatives argued that his mother had died bring-
ing her son to the United States in search of freedom and that she would have
wished for her child to live in the United States.
On December 8, Cuban president Fidel Castro demanded that Elián be re-
turned to Cuba. After Castro’s statement, Lázaro González submitted Elián’s
political asylum application to the INS. A policy created in 1994 grants any
Cuban who makes it to land the right to apply for asylum and to stay in the
290
González rescue
United States. However, anyone caught before reaching land is sent back to
Cuba.
Political Battle On January 5, the INS announced that Elián belonged

with his father and must be returned to Cuba. However, Elián’s Miami rela-
tives’ attorneys pleaded for the attorney general to reconsider the case. In Mi-
ami, in response to the INS statement, hundreds of Cuban American protest-
ers blocked intersections and cut off access to the port. Many were arrested.
Following the protests, Lázaro González filed petitions for temporary cus-
tody of Elián in a Florida state court. Attorney General Janet Reno denied
González’s request to overturn the decision of the INS commissioner. On Jan-
uary 22, Elián’s Cuban grandmothers came to the United States and met with
Reno to appeal for Elián’s return to Cuba. They also met with Elián but re-
turned to Cuba without the boy.
Subsequently, Elián’s Miami relatives argued for an asylum hearing. U.S.
district judge K. Michael Moore was assigned to hear the case, and U.S. gov-
Image Not Available
291
González rescue
ernment lawyers asked Moore to dismiss the asylum lawsuit. Demonstrators

tied up traffic outside the court, and others gathered outside the González
home in support of the family. Judge Moore dismissed the lawsuit, and the
INS informed the Miami relatives that it would revoke Elián’s legal status in
the United States and strip them of their right to care for him if they did not
hand over the boy once the appeals were exhausted.
In March, Castro announced that he would send Juan Miguel González to
the United States to pick up his son. The U.S. State Department approved vi-
sas for González, his wife, and their infant son as well as Elián’s cousin, his
teacher, and his pediatrician to travel to the United States. On April 6, the Cu-
bans arrived in Washington, D.C. Following more demonstrations, Miami
Dade mayor Alex Penelas called on the Cuban American community for
peace.
Reno met with Elián’s Miami relatives and ordered them to surrender the
boy. However, the relatives defied the order and obtained a court order to
keep Elián in the United States. The federal appeals court extended the court
order until a May hearing. Nevertheless, on April 22, after long negotiations
with Elián’s Miami relatives and their lawyers, Reno gave orders for federal
agents to seize Elián from their home. In response to the surprise 5:15 a.m.
raid in which Elián was removed from the home, people in Miami rioted in
the streets for two days. More than 268 people were arrested.
On May 11, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta heard
oral arguments from lawyers for Elián’s father and Miami relatives. However,
on June 1, the Atlanta federal court ruled Elián was not entitled to a political
asylum hearing and upheld a Miami federal judge’s ruling that Elián’s father
had the right to speak on his behalf. After several requests from the Miami rel-
atives’ attorneys, the court advised them that the injunction preventing Elián
from leaving the United States would expire at 4 p.m. on June 28, and on that
day, Elián, his father, and the rest of his family and friends returned to Cuba.
Consequences For Castro and his people, Elián represented a kidnapped

child who should be returned to his father. The streets of Cardenas, Elián’s
place of birth, were filled with posters demanding Elián’s return to Cuba. Cas-
tro’s ultimatums and his handling of the situation may have enhanced his
stature among his followers. However, some Cuba experts suggested that Cas-
tro used the situation to distract human rights advocates from political and
human rights problems during 1999 in Cuba and his own people from severe
economic problems during 2000. For Cuban Americans in Miami, Elián was a
symbol of Cuban suffering and a poster child for the anti-Castro movement.
They felt that he would have access to a more prosperous life in the United
States and that once he returned to Cuba, he would live a life of communist
brainwashing.
Although many Cuban Americans thought that trying to keep the boy in
the United States was the right thing to do, influential voices questioned
whether they should have made a five-year-old child a symbol of the battle
292
Green cards
against Castro. Others thought that the Elián saga weakened the influence of
Cuban Americans in the U.S. government. Finally, the case raised an impor-
tant question of who should decide a child’s future—parents or government
officials.
José A. Carmona
Further Reading
Rutgers University Press, 2000.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.
See also Coast Guard, U.S.; Cuban immigrants; Cuban refugee policy;
Haitian boat people; Mariel boatlift; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
Green cards
Definition: Identification documents carried by immigrants in the United
States certifying that they are legal residents
Immigration issues: Border control; Citizenship and naturalization; Illegal

immigration; Labor; Law enforcement
Significance: Crucial possessions to resident aliens in the United States,

green cards have come to symbolize the aspirations of many immigrants.
The formal name of the plastic identity cards certifying that their bearers are
legally admitted resident aliens is Alien Registration Receipt Cards. First used
during the 1940’s, when the United States began registering and fingerprint-
ing aliens as a wartime security precaution, the cards were originally green.
They have continued to be known as “green cards,” even though their color
and design have been changed several times to deter forgery. They were blue
during the 1960’s and 1970’s, white during the 1980’s, and pink during the
1990’s.
The cards are issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
to aliens who have fully complied with the provisions of the immigration laws
governing their admission to the United States as permanent residents eli-
gible for naturalization. Each card contains the alien’s name, photograph,
thumbprint, date of birth, registration number, and an expiration date. Cards
issued since 1989 expire after ten years.
293
Green cards
The cards are highly val-

ued, because they permit
holders to legally seek gain-
ful employment and to live
undisturbed anywhere in the
United States. Illegal aliens
violate the immigration laws
if they accept employment
and are subject to deporta-
tion when discovered living
in the United States. Stu-
dents and visitors temporar-
ily resident in the country
are also barred from work-
ing and are subject to de-
portation if they overstay the
visitor’s period specified in
their entrance visas.
Because of the value of
green cards, a whole indus-
Mexican farmworkers presenting their green cards as they try has sprung up to forge
cross the border into the United States at Calexico to shop them. On occasion, INS em-
in American stores. (NARA) ployees have succumbed to
the temptation to sell cards
for substantial payments. Prices vary widely. In 1990, for example, an INS man-
ager was accused of accepting more than $100,000 in bribes from Colombian
drug smugglers for supplying false official documents that authorized the is-
suance of authentic green cards. Reportedly, false green cards could be pur-
chased for as little as twenty dollars in central Los Angeles. Even if crude, the
cards permit employers to hire cheap labor while appearing to comply with the
letter of the law, which prohibits them from knowingly hiring illegal aliens.
Green card holders are entitled to apply for naturalization as United States
citizens after five years of residence provided they have not engaged in crimi-
nal activity, can read and write simple English, and demonstrate a basic knowl-
edge of the history and government of the United States. They must pay in-
come tax on all money earned anywhere in the world and cannot remain
outside the country for more than one year without special permission. Aliens
enjoy the civil rights, liberties, and due process of law guaranteed by the U.S.
Constitution, as well as the protections of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments in
criminal matters. When conscription is in force, green card holders can be
drafted into the armed forces and may be required to register with the Selec-
tive Service. However, unlike American citizens, they are not entitled to U.S.
passports or the protection of U.S. consulates when traveling abroad.
Milton Berman
294
Gypsies immigrants
Further Reading
Baldwin, Carl R. Immigration: Questions and Answers. New York: Allworth Press,
1995.
Washington, D.C.: Catholic Legal Immigration Network, 2002.
Kimmel, Barbara B., and Alan M. Lubiner. Immigration Made Simple: An Easy
Guide to the U.S. Immigration Process. Rev. ed. Chester, N.J.: Next Decade,
1996.
wood Press, 1999.
Lewis, Loida Nicolas. How to Get a Green Card. 6th ed. Berkeley, Calif.: Nolo,
2005.
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Illegal aliens; Immigration law.
Gypsy immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from various European coun-
tries who call themselves Rom
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Stereotypes
Significance: The United States is home to an estimated quarter of a million

to one million people of Gypsy ancestry. Nevertheless, Gypsies are one of
the least assimilated and most misunderstood ethnic groups in North
America.
Most scholars believe that the Gypsies are descended from a caste of enter-
tainers in ancient India. No one knows precisely why they left their original
home, but ancient historical records report that thousands of these enter-
tainers were sent to Persia in the ninth century b.c.e. From Persia, they ap-
parently migrated to various parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and Eu-
rope.
Some Gypsies migrated to North America and Latin America during colo-
nial times from the British Isles and from Spain and Portugal. The French
emperor Napoleon Bonaparte deported hundreds of Gypsies from France to
the then-French colony of Louisiana, which became part of the United States
in 1803. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, North Amer-
ica received large waves of immigrants from southern Europe, and many
Gypsies arrived at this time. The fall of European communism during the
early 1990’s led to another wave of Gypsy migration from eastern Europe.
295
Gypsies immigrants
Gypsies living in Chicago’s South Side in 1941. (Library of Congress)
Despite their long history in the United States, Gypsies have retained a dis-
tinctive ethnic identity and resisted assimilating into mainstream American
culture. They frequently avoid census takers, and because of the negative ste-
reotypes often attached to them, many Gypsies are somewhat secretive about
their ethnic identity. Therefore, there is no precise count of the Gypsies in
the United States, although estimates run from 250,000 to 1 million. The two
largest Gypsy American groups are those who trace their ancestry to southern
and eastern Europe and refer to themselves as the Rom and those who trace
their ancestry to the British Isles and refer to themselves as Romnichals.
Gypsies from Mexico, who migrated to the Americas from Spain, often call
themselves Gitanos. Most Gypsy Americans speak some branch of the Romani
language as well as English.
Modern Gypsies are less nomadic than their ancestors were, but Gypsies
still move around much more often than most other Americans do. They
tend to make their homes in large cities, where employment is available. The
largest concentrations are found in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York,
Chicago, Boston, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Seattle, and Portland.
Relations between Gypsy Americans and other ethnic groups are often
troubled by a lack of trust and understanding. Gypsy Americans do volun-
tarily remain separate from non-Gypsies, and traditional Gypsy belief even
teaches that non-Gypsies are ritually unclean. They prefer to avoid public
schooling and often educate their children within their own families, which
perpetuates their distinctiveness. Popular images of Gypsies stereotype them
as romantic wanderers or as career criminals preying on all outsiders. Despite
the latter stereotype, though, the conviction rates of Gypsy Americans for se-
296
Haitian boat people
rious crimes such as rape and murder are actually lower than comparable
rates of other Americans. Gypsy American conviction rates for theft, more-
over, are no higher than those of the American population in general.
Further Reading
Sutherland, Anne. Gypsies: The Hidden Americans. London: Tavistock, 1975.
Sway, Marlene. Familiar Strangers: Gypsy Life in America. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1988.
Tong, Diane, ed. Gypsies: An Interdisciplinary Reader. New York: Garland, 1998.
See also European immigrants, 1790-1892; European immigrants, 1892-

1943; White ethnics; Xenophobia.
Haitian boat people

Definition: Haitian refugees who attempt to reach the United States on
small boats
Immigration issues: African Americans; Border control; Illegal immigra-

tion; Refugees; West Indian immigrants
Significance: During the mid-1980’s, increasing numbers of Haitians at-

tempted to reach the United States by boat to escape the political chaos in
their homeland. U.S. policy toward these illegal immigrants has varied be-
tween receiving the Haitians as refugees and treating them as unwanted il-
legal aliens.
On January 31, 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court voted, by a vote of six to three,
with Justices Clarence Thomas, Harry A. Blackmun, and John Paul Stevens
dissenting, to grant the government’s motion to stay an injunction prohibit-
ing the forcible return of Haitians who had fled their country. Attorney Gen-
eral William Barr stated that the government now had clear authority to re-
turn the more than nine thousand Haitian refugees held at Guantánamo
Naval Base in Cuba. That authority would remain in force until a decision on
repatriation could be made by the United States Court of Appeals of the Elev-
enth Circuit in Atlanta, and that decision appealed to the Supreme Court.
In the weeks preceding the lifting of the injunction, the number of refu-
gees fleeing Haiti had increased dramatically. When the government could
297
Haitian boat people
no longer accommodate the refugees aboard the Coast Guard cutters patrol-
ling the waters between Haiti and the United States, the naval base at Guan-
tánamo was prepared for them. The base quickly became overcrowded as
more refugees arrived daily. The U.S. State Department estimated that only
one-third of the refugees qualified for political asylum. The remaining refu-
gees were fleeing economic conditions.
Hours after the Supreme Court lifted the injunction, the Coast Guard
cutter Steadfast, with 150 Haitians on board, sailed from Guantánamo on the
ten- to twelve-hour voyage to Port-au-Prince, the Haitian capital. Additional
Haitians were sent back in the next two days. Previously, about four hundred
Haitians had returned voluntarily through the United Nations High Commis-
sioner for Refugees.
President George Bush had strongly condemned the growing political vio-
lence in Haiti. On January 25, 1992, he recalled Ambassador Alvin P. Adams,
Jr., following an attack by police officers in civilian clothes on a political meet-
ing called by Communist Party leader René Theodore, who had been nomi-
nated prime minister in a compromise concluded several weeks before the
meeting. President Bush believed that chances for a political settlement in
Haiti were decreasing and was concerned that the increasing number of Hai-
tian refugees would be too large for the United States to handle. Opposition
to the administration’s repatriation policy was raised by civil rights groups
and others who charged that the policy was racist. Their attempt to stop the
program by injunction had delayed the return of the boat people but did not
stop it.
The Refugee Problem In February of 1986, the military seized power in

Haiti after a thirty-year rule by the Duvalier family. François Duvalier had
ruled from 1956 to 1971 and his son Jean-Claude Duvalier ruled from 1971 to
1986. After 1986, the military continued the extremely repressive and brutal
policies of the Duvaliers. In 1990, popular demonstrations and a general
strike brought about the downfall of the military, followed by open elections
in December. Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a Roman Catholic priest, was elected
president. He advocated far-reaching political reforms and social changes.
He was able to remain in office not quite a year before being overthrown by
the military.
Amnesty International reported that under military rule the Haitian peo-
ple were living in a climate of fear and repression and that hundreds of peo-
ple were extrajudicially executed or were detained without warrant and tor-
tured. Many were brutally beaten in the streets. Freedom of the press was
severely curtailed, and property was destroyed by members of the military
and the police.
The nations of the Organization of American States, including the United
States, imposed an embargo to pressure Haiti for the return of the duly
elected president to power. The embargo added to the problems of the Hai-
tian people, who were the poorest in the Western Hemisphere. Shortages of
298
Haitian boat people
fuel, food, medicines, and potable water developed, and unemployment in-
creased because factories had to close when they ran out of fuel. More than
140,000 Haitians fled after the coup. During the month of January, 1992,
6,653 were picked up at sea. The Bush administration felt compelled to re-
turn those Haitians it regarded as economic, rather than political, refugees.
The United States government had begun returning Haitians in Novem-
ber, 1991, but at the end of the year had been restrained by the injunction ob-
tained by civil rights advocates in Miami, Florida. The Bush administration
feared that at least an additional twenty thousand Haitians would flee the is-
land. The lifting of the injunction in January, 1992, gave the administration a
victory. The return of refugees resumed with the voyage of the Steadfast.
Consequences The Supreme Court again refused, on February 11, 1992,

to end the return of the refugees, and the repatriation program continued.
When opponents failed to stop the program by court order, they turned to
Congress. Representative Charles E. Summer, a member of the House Sub-
committee on International Law, Immigration, and Refugees, introduced
legislation granting Haitians protected status that would permit them to stay
in the United States until Haiti’s military government was overthrown. The
proposed legislation also granted a quota of two thousand refugees from
Haiti. The legislation was not passed.
The repatriation problem was solved in September, 1994, when President
Bill Clinton sent former president Jimmy Carter, General Colin L. Powell,
and Senator Sam Nunn to negotiate an agreement with General Raoul
Cédras, the ruler of Haiti, for the return of Aristide to serve the remainder of
his term. United States forces temporarily occupied Haiti to ensure an or-
derly transition of political power and the development of democratic gov-
ernment. The United States obtained a foreign policy victory in 1994 with the
return of Aristide to the presidency in Haiti—where he was again ousted in
2004. At the same time, the problem of Haitians fleeing to the United States
was solved. Civil rights groups in the United States and abroad, however, criti-
cized U.S. policy on the basis of humanitarian and civil rights concerns. Oth-
ers charged the United States with racism. Overall, the gamble by President
Clinton when he sent troops into Haiti redounded to his credit and gave a
boost to his foreign policy.
Robert D. Talbott
Further Reading
Blake, Nicholas J., and Razan Husain. Immigration, Asylum and Human Rights.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Laguerre, Michel S. Diasporic Citizenship: Haitian Americans in Transnational
America. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998.
299
Haitian immigrants
Stepick, Alex. Pride Against Prejudice: Haitians in the United States. Boston: Allyn
& Bacon, 1998.
Yoshida, Chisato, and Alan D. Woodland. The Economics of Illegal Immigration.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Zéphir, Flore. The Haitian Americans. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press,
2004.
See also González rescue; Haitian immigrants; Helsinki Watch report on

U.S. refugee policy; Mariel boatlift; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
Haitian immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Caribbean island
nation of Haiti
Immigration issues: African Americans; Demographics; Refugees; West In-

dian immigrants
Significance: Primarily of African descent, Haitians have immigrated to the

United States, particularly New York and Florida, in significant numbers
since the 1950’s. In general, U.S. policy toward Haitians has been unrecep-
tive since the 1970’s, treating them as economic migrants rather than refu-
gees.
During the 1980’s and early 1990’s, many Haitians seeking asylum in the
United States were intercepted at sea and forced to return to Haiti. This treat-
ment contrasts with that of Cuban asylum seekers, who have generally re-
ceived a generous welcome to U.S. shores as legitimate refugees. The U.S. gov-
ernment’s differential treatment of Cubans fleeing the Marxist-dominated
Fidel Castro government and of Haitians fleeing a very poor country gov-
erned by right-wing repressive leaders caused many to question U.S. refugee
policy. In addition, Haitians speak Creole and are black, leading some to sug-
gest latent racist motivations for the U.S. government’s actions.
The Haitian Immigration Experience Haitians, like citizens of most Ca-

ribbean countries, have for many decades participated in labor-based migra-
tion throughout the Caribbean region, including the United States. Haiti’s
economy is among the poorest in the Western Hemisphere, providing a sig-
nificant reason for migration. However, authoritarian regimes also contrib-
uted to migration, as some people fled political repression. During the 1950’s
and 1960’s, skilled Haitian professionals legally entered the United States
and Canada as permanent or temporary immigrants. Although many left
300
Haitian immigrants
Haitian Immigration to the United States,

1932-2003
20,000
1986-1990
18,000 military rule
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000 1915-1934
U.S. occupation 1957-1986
2,000 of Haiti Duvalier family
dictatorships
0
1932-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. 2001-2003
Haiti in part because of political repression, they were treated as routine im-
migrants rather than refugees. Legal immigration continued throughout the
1970’s and 1980’s, but larger numbers of much poorer people also began to
leave Haiti by boat.
For many years, Haiti was governed by the authoritarian regimes of Fran-
çois “Papa Doc” Duvalier and his son, Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, who
finally fled the country in 1986. A series of repressive regimes continued to
rule the country until Haiti’s first democratically elected government, that of
Jean-Bertrand Aristide, was established in 1990. This government was over-
thrown by a military coup in 1991, however, and had to be reinstalled by the
international community in 1994, after three years of devastating economic
sanctions imposed by the United Nations that, coupled with domestic politi-
cal repression, precipitated large flows of refugees. The refugee flows sub-
sided once the military regime gave up power, the U.N. peacekeeping forces
were deployed, the Aristide government was reestablished, and the economic
sanctions were removed. However, another military coup overthrew Aristide
a second time in early 2004.
301
Haitian immigrants
Thousands of Haitians have immigrated to the United States since the

early 1970’s. Many thousands more were deported because they were judged
to be lacking legitimate asylum claims. Those who managed to stay in the
United States concentrated around already existing Haitian communities in
Florida, especially in the Miami area, and in New York City, where several
hundred thousand Haitians make their home. Lacking significant public as-
sistance, the Haitians who settled in the United States during the 1970’s and
1980’s were obliged to rely on aid from charitable organizations and the al-
ready established local Haitian communities.
Reactions to the Immigrants Reactions to the Haitian migration varied

considerably. Generally, the earlier and more skilled migration out of Haiti
was uncontroversial. As larger numbers of poorer Haitians, especially the
“boat people,” sought entry into the United States, however, concern about
the economic implications of these undocumented migrants arose. Local
politicians, especially in southern Florida, under pressure from their constit-
uents, including elite members of the Cuban exile group, along with others
concerned about the potentially disruptive Haitian flow, put pressure on
Congress and successive presidents to deter the Haitian migration.
However, steps by the federal government to staunch the Haitian migra-
tory flows eventually prompted political opposition by second-generation Cu-
bans, voluntary agencies, human rights groups, and the Congressional Black
Caucus. Many of these groups charged that the discriminatory treatment of
Haitians was based at least in part on race. Efforts to detain Haitians in the
United States were successfully challenged in court, and advocates for Hai-
tians won a number of court-related victories to ensure fairer treatment for
Haitian asylum seekers. The interdiction programs instituted by President
Ronald Reagan, however, continued under the presidencies of George Bush
and Bill Clinton. Only with the return of democracy to Haiti in 1994 did the
migration pressures from Haiti to the United States ease.
Future Prospects The return of stability to the Haitian political system

and the application of considerable international economic assistance holds
out hope that Haiti will benefit from economic development, thus encourag-
ing investment at home and further reducing pressures for migration abroad.
The booming economy in the United States during the 1990’s and the reduc-
tion in illegal and undocumented migration from Haiti helped to reduce the
controversy surrounding Haitian migration.
Robert F. Gorman
Further Reading Three books that discuss the Haitian experience in the
United States are Flore Zéphir’s The Haitian Americans (Westport, Conn.:
Greenwood Press, 2004), Michel S. Laguerre’s Diasporic Citizenship: Haitian
Americans in Transnational America (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998), and
302
Hansen effect
Alex Stepick’s Pride Against Prejudice: Haitians in the United States (Boston:
Allyn & Bacon, 1998). Stepick’s Haitian Refugees in the U.S. (London: Minority
Rights Group, 1982) and Jake Miller’s The Plight of Haitian Refugees (New York:
Praeger, 1984) provide critiques of the Haitian predicament in the United
States. To set the Haitian situation into the wider immigration experience,
see Alejandro Portes and Rubén G. Rumbaut’s Immigrant America: A Portrait
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990). For a contrast of the Cuban
and Haitian refugee and resettlement experience, see Felix R. Masud-Piloto’s
From Welcomed Exiles to Illegal Immigrants (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield,
1996). On the foreign policy implications of U.S. Haitian policy, see Western
Hemisphere Immigration and United States Foreign Policy (University Park: Penn-
sylvania State University Press, 1992), edited by Christopher Mitchell. Ellen
Alexander Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants (Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press, 2004) includes a firsthand account of an immi-
grant from Haiti. Flore Zéphir’s Trends in Ethnic Identification Among Second-
Generation Haitian Immigrants in New York City (Westport, Conn.: Bergin &
Garvey, 2001) examines the Haitian community of New York City. Ethnicities:
Children of Immigrants in America (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2001), edited by Rubén G. Rumbaut and Alejandro Portes, is a collection of
papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants that in-
cludes chapters on Haitians and other West Indians. This Land Is Our Land:
Immigrants and Power in Miami (Berkeley: University of California Press,
2003), by Alex Stepick and others, is a study of competitition and conflict
among Miami’s largest ethnic groups—Cubans, Haitians, and African Ameri-
cans.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Cuban immigrants and African Amer-

icans; Dominican immigrants; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Haitian boat
people; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations; Santería; West Indian immi-
grants.
Hansen effect
Definition: Sociological theory relating to the experiences of immigrants in
the United States
Significance: In The Problem of the Third Generation Immigrants (1937), sociol-

ogist Marcus Lee Hansen found that immigrants have more similar experi-
ences in adjusting to life in the United States within generations than
across the generations.
303
Hawaiian and Pacific islander immigrants
Hansen reported that the first generation of immigrants, often finding it dif-
ficult to learn English and seek gainful employment, remained oriented to
the home country. The first generation tended to observe customs of the
home country in matters of dress, food, language spoken at home, recre-
ation, and cultural values.
The second generation, whether born in the United States or brought to
the new country at a very early age, attended school with nonimmigrant chil-
dren and attempted to assimilate because of peer pressure, which often ridi-
culed old-fashioned habits and values. The second generation, thus, rejected
an identification with the parents’ home country in order to be accepted and
prosper in the new country.
The third generation, in contrast, has been eager to rediscover the tradi-
tions of the root cultures from which they came. Cultural pride, in short,
emerged as the third generation’s reaction to the efforts of the second gener-
ation to neglect its origins and cultural heritage.
The Hansen effect was postulated primarily with reference to European
Americans, however. The culture of African Americans was thoroughly sup-
pressed, and the various generations of Asian Americans and Hispanic Ameri-
cans have tended to retain the values of their ancestors.
Michael Haas
Further Reading
Zølner, Mette. Re-imagining the Nation: Debates on Immigrants, Identities and
Memories. New York: P.I.E.-P. Lang, 2000.
See also Assimilation theories; Ethnic enclaves; Generational accultura-

tion; Melting pot.
Hawaiian and Pacific

islander immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Polynesian, Melane-
sian, and Micronesian islands of the South Pacific
Immigration issues: Demographics; Native Americans
Significance: The ethnically diverse peoples from the South Pacific main-
tain relatively harmonious relationships while negotiating inclusion in the
U.S. labor market and European American and Asian American institu-
tions and exploring their rights as indigenous peoples.
304
Hawaiian Americans are individuals with Hawaiian ancestry who are Ameri-
can citizens. Pacific islander Americans are American Samoans, Guamanians,
and people of the Northern Mariana Islands and Pacific atolls who reside on
their islands, in Hawaii, or on the mainland United States. Pre-1980 census
publications did not differentiate Pacific islander groups except for Hawai-
ians. Pacific islanders sometimes move to the mainland United States because
of the mainland’s better economic prospects and educational opportunities.
Generally, they adapt more easily to suburban and rural areas than to large
urban areas. During the 1990’s, Asian and Pacific islander Americans were
the fastest-growing minority group in the United States, with the Hawaiian
group being the largest.
Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands The territory of Guam and
the U.S. commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are believed to
have been inhabited as early as 2000 b.c.e. by ancient Chamorros of Mayo-
Polynesian descent. Colonized by Spanish missionaries in 1668, Guam was an-
nexed by the United States in 1898 and ceded to the United States in 1919.
Guam was occupied by the Japanese during World War II and retaken by the
United States in 1944. In 1950, Guam’s inhabitants were given U.S. citizen-
ship. When the 1962 Naval Clearing Act allowed other ethnic groups to make
Guam their home, Filipinos, Europeans, Japanese, Chinese, Indians, and
Pacific islanders moved there, joining the Carolinians and present-day Cha-
morros.
Guam’s 1990 census recorded a population that was 47 percent Chamorro,
25 percent Filipino, and 10 percent European, with Chinese, Japanese, Ko-
rean, and others making up the remaining 18 percent. Ninety percent are Ro-
man Catholics. Guam is a self-governing, organized unincorporated terri-
tory, and policy relations between Guam and the United States are under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of the Interior. A 1972 U.S. law gave
Guam one nonvoting delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. Guam
remains a cosmopolitan community retaining customs and traditions from
many cultures and has a flourishing tourist industry.
Saipan, Tinian, and Rota, the principal islands of the Mariana Islands, have
a long history of foreign occupation, by the Spanish from 1521 to 1899, the
Germans from 1899 to 1914, and the Japanese from 1914 to 1944. From 1947
to 1978, the area was recognized as a trust territory of the United Nations with
the United States as the administering authority. In 1978, the islands became
self-governing in political union with the United States. When the United Na-
tions Trusteeship Council concluded that the United States had discharged
its obligations to the Mariana Islands, the United States conferred citizenship
upon individuals who met the necessary qualifications. The Security Council
of the United Nations voted to dissolve the trusteeship in 1990.
American Samoa The Samoans’ heritage is Polynesian. European visitors,

traders, and missionaries arrived in the eighteenth century. In 1872, Pago
305
Pago harbor was ceded to the United States as a naval station. An 1899 treaty
among Great Britain, Germany, and the United States made Samoa neutral,
but when kingship was abolished the following year, the Samoan islands east
of 171 degrees were given to the United States. American Samoa remains an
unincorporated territory administered by the U.S. Department of the Inte-
rior. The 57,366 people (as of 1995), who live mostly on Tutuila, are American
nationals. Although unable to vote in federal elections, American Samoans
can freely enter the United States and, after fulfilling the residency require-
ments, can become citizens. Their language is Samoan but many speak En-
glish. In 1995, it was estimated that 65,000 Samoans had migrated to the
United States, living mainly in California, Washington, and Hawaii. In Ha-
waii, they have experienced “cultural discrimination” before a public housing
eviction board and have been called a stigmatized ethnic group.
Hawaii It is estimated that the final migration of Hawaiians from Polynesia

occurred about 750 c.e. Hawaii’s early social system consisted of the ali’i (no-
bility), who imposed hierarchical control over the maka’ainana (common-
ers), whose labor supported a population that, by the mid-eighteenth cen-
tury, had increased to at least 300,000. England’s Captain James Cook, who
reached Kauai in 1778, named Hawaii the Sandwich Islands. King Kameha-
meha first unified the islands of Maui, Oahu, Hawaii, Lanai, and Molokai un-
der a single political regime in 1795. Kauai and Niihau joined the union in
1810. The first Congregationalist missionaries arrived from New England in
1820, followed by European and American merchants and Yankee traders.
With Western contact came diseases for which the Hawaiians had no immu-
nity or treatment. By 1853, the native population had fallen to seventy-one
thousand.
Chinese, Japanese, and Portuguese immigrants arrived to provide labor
for the sugar plantations. Workers coming from Korea, Puerto Rico, Europe,
Scandinavia, Russia, Micronesia, Polynesia, and the Philippines considered
themselves temporary immigrants. By 1890, Hawaii was a multiethnic society
in which non-Hawaiians made up most of the population. Hawaii’s indepen-
dence was recognized by the United States from 1826 until 1893, when Ameri-
can and European sugar plantation owners, descendants of missionaries, and
financiers deposed the Hawaiian monarchy, established a provisional govern-
ment, and proclaimed Hawaii a protectorate of the United States. Annexed
by Congress in 1898, Hawaii became a U.S. territory in 1900 and the fiftieth
state in 1959.
During the 1970’s, a Hawaiian rights and sovereignty movement emerged.
Viewed, at first, as a radical grassroots minority, the movement gained mo-
mentum after a series of demonstrations and acts of civil disobedience. In
1977, representatives from many organizations and individual Hawaiians met
in Puwalu sessions to discuss Hawaiian issues. State Supreme Court justice
William Richardson advised Hawaiians to use the courts to redress griev-
ances, challenge laws, and assert gathering, access, and water rights. A consti-
306
tutional convention, primarily con-

cerned by the state’s improper use
of lands ceded to the United States
after annexation and transferred to
the state in 1959, reviewed and re-
vised the functions and responsibili-
ties of Hawaii’s government in 1978.
The following year, the legislature
created the Office of Hawaiian Af-
fairs (OHA) to provide and coordi-
nate programs, advocate for Hawai-
ians, and serve as a receptacle for
reparations.
Throughout the succeeding ten
years, sovereignty groups strongly crit-
icized the OHA. In 1993, the U.S.
Congress officially acknowledged and
apologized for the actions a hundred
years earlier (U.S. Public Law 103-
150). That same year, the sovereignty
groups Ka Laahui and Hui Na’auao
were awarded education grants, and
Governor John Waihee formed the
Hawaiian Sovereignty Advisory Com- Queen Liliuokalani, the last monarch of the Ha-
mission, which was renamed in 1996 waiian kingdom, around 1893. (Hawaii State
as Ha Hawaii. The most radical sov- Archives)
ereignty group, the Oahana Coun-
cil, declared independence from the United States in January, 1994. In 1997,
a number of workshops were conducted by kupuna (elders) who emphasized
unity among the various factions. When Governor Benjamin Cayetano re-
solved in his 1998 state-of-the-state address “to advance a plan for Hawaiian
sovereignty,” he echoed the words of former governor Waihee. Waihee had
also ventured his concern that while establishing self-determination, Hawai-
ians would tear apart the “multicultural fabric” of contemporary Hawaiian so-
ciety.
Hawaii’s population, which had doubled after the islands gained state-
hood, fell during the 1990’s, partly because of the slow growth that resulted
from an economic recession and the vast reduction of the military presence
on the islands. Between 1990 and 1995, the state experienced a net loss of
376,752 residents to domestic migration, partly because of the high cost of liv-
ing, which in 1994 was 35 percent to 39 percent greater than the average U.S.
large city, while the median income was only about 10 percent higher.
Hawaiians living on the mainland remain connected with their heritage
and values through social, university, and cultural associations that promote
cultural events and regularly publish newsletters. Hula halaus exist in many
307
states, and Hawaii’s music industry brings musicians to the mainland for live
performances. Local Hawaiian newspapers are available on the Internet. Pa-
cific islanders confront various integration difficulties after moving to the
United States. Because federal and state statistics combine Pacific islanders
and Asian Americans, it is impossible to obtain reliable demographics. Such
statistical reporting complicates the interpretation of data on household con-
figuration, earned income, and educational and professional attainment.
The U.S. government’s Current Population Report (1992) noted that the
Asian American and Pacific islander population was not homogeneous; a
population analysis of the group as a whole masked the diversity present. Pa-
cific islanders do not identify with Asian Americans but with other island peo-
ples. This issue becomes pertinent when Pacific islanders request funding
from the Administration for Native Americans. Unlike Asian Americans, Pa-
cific islanders qualify as Native Americans. Newly arriving Asian Americans
are often placed in migrant programs. They then create businesses and
quickly move out of poverty. Research at the University of Utah showed that
Pacific islanders largely work in the service sector and their family businesses
mostly involve unskilled labor.
Most Pacific islanders reside in the western states. The Pacific islanders’
Cultural Association, founded in 1995, is an umbrella organization whose
aim is to meet the common needs of all Pacific islanders living in Northern
California.
Susan E. Hamilton
Further Reading Asians and Pacific Islanders in the United States, by demog-
raphers Herbert Barringer, Robert W. Gardner, and Michael J. Levin (New
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1995), addresses the adaptation of immi-
grants into American society. In his essay “The Hawaiian Alternative to the
One-Drop Rule,” in American Mixed Race: The Culture of Microdiversity, edited
by Naomi Zack (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1995), F. James Davis
discusses the history of the one-drop rule and the mixed-race experience on
the islands. Lawrence H. Fuchs’s Hawaii Pono: An Ethnic and Political History
(Honolulu: Bess Press, 1961) is a classic study of the diverse cultural contribu-
tions to Hawaii and the impact of American settlement from 1893 to 1959. Mi-
chael Haas’s Institutional Racism: The Case of Hawaii (Westport, Conn.: Praeger,
1992) is a well-researched inquiry into racism and ethnic relations. From a Na-
tive Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii (Monroe, Maine: Common
Courage Press, 1993) is a collection of essays by Haunani-Kay Trask, a spokes-
person for Hawaiian rights.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Asian American women; Asian Pa-
cific American Labor Alliance; Censuses, U.S.
308
Head money cases
Head money cases

The Cases: U.S. Supreme Court rulings on the taxing of immigrants
Date: December 8, 1885
Immigration issues: Court cases; Economics; Laws and treaties
Significance: The Supreme Court approved a statute allowing Congress to

levy a head tax on immigrants, thereby establishing congressional power
over immigration and taxes imposed for other purposes.
Early immigration in the United States was handled by the individual states,
some of which imposed head taxes on every immigrant whom shippers deliv-
ered to the United States. They used the revenue from those taxes to create
funds to alleviate the financial distress of immigrants. In 1849, the U.S. Su-
preme Court struck down these state laws as an interference with congressio-
nal power in the Passenger Cases.
To help the states deal with the financial burden of indigent immigrants,
Congress passed a federal per capita tax on immigrants, which it collected
and gave to the affected states. Litigants challenged the tax, claiming that
Congress could not impose a tax unless it was for the common defense or gen-
eral welfare of the people. Justice Samuel F. Miller wrote the unanimous opin-
ion rejecting their claim. He maintained that immigration was a form of com-
merce over which Congress had broad authority, and the tax in this case was
really a fee associated with regulating commerce.
Richard L. Wilson
Further Reading
wood Press, 1999.
haven Press, 2004.
See also Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases; European immi-
grants, 1790-1892; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immigration law;
Page law.
309
Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy
Helsinki Watch report on

U.S. refugee policy
The Event: Critical report of an international human rights organization on
U.S. treatment of political refugees
Date: June, 1989
Place: New York, New York
Immigration issues: Government and politics; Laws and treaties; Refugees
Significance: The Helsinki Watch report documented ways in which the

U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service’s treatment of asylum seek-
ers violated laws and international conventions and made specific recom-
mendations for correcting abuses.
Wars, dictatorial regimes. and natural disasters generated large numbers of

refugees during the 1970’s and 1980’s. Many of the refugees sought residence
in the United States. Some groups of newcomers stood excellent chances of
receiving political asylum and resettlement assistance. Others, particularly
those fleeing Haiti, Guatemala, and El Salvador. Faced detention, deporta-
tion, and an uncertain future in their homelands. Concerned citizens re-
sponded by forming human rights groups such as Helsinki Watch.
Helsinki Watch was founded in 1979, in the context of increased world
concern for the status of refugees. New legal instruments and standards had
been drafted. These included the Final Act of the Conference on Security
and Cooperation in Europe (also called the Helsinki Declaration). Under its
provisions, thirty-five countries pledged respect for security and human
rights considerations. They also pledged that it would be their aim to “facili-
tate freer movement and contacts . . . among persons, institutions, and orga-
nizations of the participating States.” Helsinki groups in many of the member
states (including notably the former Soviet Union) assumed responsibility
for monitoring their governments’ compliance with the Helsinki Declaration
and other humanitarian standards.
Human rights increasingly came to be viewed as a global concern. The fo-
cus of rights activists was no longer solely on how their governments treated
their own citizens. It was extended to any government’s policies which threat-
ened the human dignity of any country’s nationals. In the United States, the
Helsinki Watch Committee and Americas Watch were soon joined by Asia
Watch, Africa Watch, and Middle East Watch, which all combined forces as
Human Rights Watch. Human rights ideals were promoted in a pragmatic
manner, with specific recommendations addressed to policy makers. Some
human rights advocates were criticized for “solving” problems by issuing re-
310
ports and declarations for an undefined audience, but the Watch Commit-
tees’ reports were straightforward, compassionate, and subject to implemen-
tation in the near future.
Helsinki Watch Helsinki Watch was founded in 1979 by a group of pub-

lishers, lawyers, and other activists to promote domestic and international
compliance with the human rights provisions of the 1975 Helsinki accords.
The Watch Committees enlisted one of America’s leading civil liberties at-
torneys, Aryeh Neier, as Human Rights Watch executive director. Random
House publisher Robert Bernstein served as Helsinki Watch chair. Human
Rights Watch compiled reports on human rights conditions on every conti-
nent. In particular, it advocated “continuation of a generous and humane asy-
lum and refugee policy . . . , toward all nationalities.” An exemplary report
was Detained, Denied, Deported: Asylum Seekers in the United States, dated June,
1989.
The report explores concepts that are well defined in international law.
The United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951)
and the U.S. Refugee Act of 1980 define a “refugee” as one who is outside his
or her country “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution
on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social
group, or political opinion.” Asylum is a protected status which may allow ref-
ugees into a foreign country. In the United States, refugees may apply for per-
manent residency after one year. Legislation in the United States provides
that refugees may (not must) be granted asylum. It also provides that if there
is a clear probability of persecution, an individual is not (with few exceptions)
to be deported to his or her homeland.
Detained, Denied, Deported was the work of lawyer and Human Rights Watch
intern Karin König, among others. It drew on the work of leading experts on
asylum law, including Arthur Helton of the Lawyers’ Committee on Human
Rights. König’s introduction notes that poor countries, such as Malawi and
Pakistan, have assumed the biggest burden in providing asylum to refugees
from neighboring countries. In contrast, such wealthy countries as the United
States assert that most of those seeking asylum are not refugees entitled to
protection, but “economic migrants” subject to deportation.
International standards are succinctly and accurately described in the re-
port. The principle of nonrefoulement prohibits return of refugees to situations
in which they would be imperiled because of their race, religion, nationality,
social group, or political opinion. It applies only to refugees already present
in a country; it does not create a right of entry. Article 14 of the United Na-
tion’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) provides the right to
seek and enjoy asylum. (An earlier draft included a right to seek and be
granted asylum.) A United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)
conference in 1977 sought a treaty containing an individual right to asylum.
The conference was adjourned indefinitely for fear that protections would be
reduced rather than enhanced.
311
U.S. Asylum Policies A history of U.S. asylum policies identifies a new

group of “spontaneous” asylum seekers from Central America and the Carib-
bean. Their treatment has been less generous than that accorded refugees
from southeast Asia. The Refugee Act of 1980 is associated with improve-
ments—withholding of deportation where refugees would face a “clear prob-
ability” of persecution was declared mandatory, no longer left to the discre-
tion of the attorney general.
The report gradually shifts from dispassionate description of refugee poli-
cies to ardent advocacy of reform. It notes discrimination in treatment of ref-
ugees from different regions. Applicants for asylum from U.S. allies such as
Guatemala and El Salvador had to provide more extensive evidence and es-
tablish a higher level of persecution. The claim is bolstered by citing statistics:
In fiscal year 1988, Salvadorans’ and Guatemalans’ applications were ap-
proved at rates of only 3 and 5 percent respectively, compared to 75 percent
for Iranians and 77 percent for Ethiopians.
The U.S. Department of State claimed that Salvadorans and Guatemalans
sought asylum in the United States for economic (and therefore illegitimate)
reasons rather than because of persecution. The Watch Committee report in-
cludes telling case studies of government insensitivity to human feelings,
drawn from immigration lawyers and nongovernmental organizations. The
State Department is castigated for its analysis of asylum applicants’ petitions,
which is often superficial and tailored to foreign policy objectives.
Recommendations in the Report The report offered five recommenda-

tions for the executive branch of the U.S. government. First is an end to poli-
cies that deter asylum seekers from appealing negative decisions or from ap-
plying in the first place. Specific mention is made of the Haitian Interdiction
Program and of practices whereby individuals who present no threat to soci-
ety are detained. The next two recommendations address the role and train-
ing of immigration agents and judges. Immigration and Naturalization Ser-
vice (INS) agents should receive special training so that they can properly
follow national and international law.
To eliminate political bias, independent organizations’ human rights re-
ports should be given greater emphasis than State Department analyses. An
agency independent from the State and Justice Departments should be in-
volved in asylum adjudication. Although asylum seekers present in the United
States receive the most extensive publicity, many more apply through the
Overseas Admission Program (OAP). The Watch recommends that the OAP
include a formal right of appeal, and that its activities ensure generous
and nondiscriminatory admission from areas where the UNHCR determines
a need. Finally, decisions of judicial and administrative bodies (many of
which assure protection to the asylum applicant) need to he fully imple-
mented.
Congress is prodded as well. It is urged to take appropriate action and to
enact legislation to control the attorney general’s discretion to ensure consis-
312
tent and impartial application. When immigration authorities are expected

to enforce and adjudicate immigration laws, the former task overshadows
and distorts the latter. Although not in the Recommendations section, the
text includes a specific plea for granting extended voluntary departure status
(or “safe haven”) to Salvadorans and Guatemalans.
Detained, Denied, Deported is part of an ongoing research program. Helsinki
Watch pays close attention to U.S. refugee issues, and Americas Watch moni-
tors repression in El Salvador and Haiti. Human Rights Watch played a key
role in another 1989 report. Forced Out: The Agony of the Refugee in Our Time,
which sought to “awaken, alarm, shock, and horrify,” in order to counter
“compassion fatigue” in addressing global dimensions of the refugee issue.
Efforts such as the Helsinki Watch group’s encountered opposition. Well-
funded lobbies sought to limit immigration and would make exceptions for
very few of those who feared persecution. It would be up to other nongovern-
mental groups, Congress, and the courts to promote reform.
Aftermath The Helsinki Watch report did not produce immediate change
in U.S. policies and received minimal press coverage. By acting in combina-
tion with other advocates for the refugee, however, the Watch Committee
helped encourage steps to make American policy more humane. A diverse
movement advocating refugee concerns hoped to ensure humane treatment
through three channels.
First are reforms instituted by the executive branch and Congress. The Im-
migration Act of 1990 contained important new provisions. Cognizance of
the plight of Salvadoran refugees was reflected in “safe haven” provisions
(they were eligible for an eighteen-month period of safe haven if they could
prove their nationality and show that they had arrived in the United States
prior to September 19, 1990). The justification is that during a civil war pro-
tection is justified, but not asylum. Safe haven is to be temporary; applicants
are expected to return to El Salvador eventually. Immigration rights activists
welcomed this step, but they criticized stiff fees for applicants, higher than for
applicants under similar programs for Libyan, Liberian, and Kuwaiti refu-
gees. They also noted other measures such as the “investor visas,” which pro-
vided special access for rich would-be immigrants.
Second are court decisions and settlements. In Orantes-Hernandez v. Meese
a federal district court concluded that INS practices constituted coercion of
Salvadoran asylum applicants. The court noted that applicants’ access to
counsel was often frustrated and ordered remedial steps. In another case, the
Center for Constitutional Rights, a public-interest law firm, charged the
United States with ideological bias in processing Guatemalan and Salvadoran
asylum requests, contrary to the Refugee Act. The government agreed under
a settlement to allocate $200,000 for a publicity campaign to notify refugees
of their rights. The INS agreed to review 150,000 applications that it had de-
nied in the last ten years. Another 1991 case broadened protection for chil-
dren who were detained. A federal appellate court was persuaded that due
313
process was violated by refusing to release immigrant children to nonrelatives

or social service agencies.
A third area is growth of the lobby which promotes the rights of refugees.
Activists are drawing connections between human rights of a country’s own
citizens and rights of refugees. The American Civil Liberties Union and Am-
nesty International have determined that important aspects of asylum and
refugee issues fall within their limited mandates.
Refugee studies are drawing attention from scholars in law and the policy
sciences. Many of their efforts provide data which can be used by advocates
for the potential asylum applicant. Key figures in the media and entertain-
ment industry also help call attention to the plight of refugees.
Aliens view the United States as a land with an open door to the oppressed,
but that door might more aptly he described as guarded. Nongovernmental
organizations such as Helsinki Watch will continue to play a major role in
opening America to the persecuted. A useful instrument in this effort will be
the issuance of reports such as Detained, Denied, Deported, reports that describe
U.S. obligations under national and international law and identify policies
that advance human dignity.
Arthur Blaser
Further Reading
Allport, Alan. Immigration Policy. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2005. Study of
U.S. immigration and refugee policies written for young-adult readers.
covered are the economic contributions of immigrants, government obli-
gations to address humanitarian problems, and enforcement of laws regu-
lating undocumented workers.
Blake, Nicholas J., and Razan Husain. Immigration, Asylum and Human Rights.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Study of human rights issues re-
lating to immigration throughout the world. Includes a postscript on the
challenges of protecting human rights after the terrorist attacks of Sep-
tember 11, 2001.
Detained, Denied, Deported: Asylum Seekers in the United States. New York: U.S.
Helsinki Watch Committee, 1989. Well-organized, readable description of
asylum law, with application to U.S. practices. Includes a useful statistical
appendix.
Frelick, Bill. Refugees at Our Border: The U.S. Response to Asylum Seekers. Wash-
ington, D.C.: U.S. Committee for Refugees, 1989. Brief report on a fact-
finding trip which raises many of the same issues as the Helsinki Watch
study. Urges improved access for asylum seekers to attorneys and non-
profit agencies.
Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch Annual Report. New York: Author,
314
1987-. Summary of the Watch Committee’s work. It reports on the variety

of studies which identify and analyze human rights violations. Also moni-
tors each U.S. administration’s compliance with human rights standards.
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights and Helsinki Watch. Mother of Exiles:
Refugees Imprisoned in America. New York: Author, 1986. Readable descrip-
tion of the plight of eleven detainees, published to coincide with the cente-
nary celebrations for the Statue of Liberty. Arthur Helton’s essay identifies
violations of U.S. and international law.
York: Foundation Press, 2002. Legal textbook on immigration and refugee
law.
Loescher, Gil, and John A. Scanlan. Calculated Kindness: Refugees and America’s
Half-Open Door, 1945 to the Present. New York: Free Press, 1986. An excellent
review of the history and politics of U.S. refugee policies. Notes and ex-
plains patterns of discrimination and the “unprecedented harshness” of
the Reagan administration. Draws on extensive interviews and archival re-
search.
MacEoin, Gary, and Nivita Riley. No Promised Land: American Refugee Policies
and the Rule of Law. New York: OXFAM America, 1982. Thoughtful analysis
conducted for a nongovernmental organization with an emphasis on refu-
gees from Haiti, El Salvador, and Guatemala. Discussion of INS procedures
concludes that the INS violates U.S. and international law.
Silk, James. Despite a Generous Spirit: Denying Asylum in the United States. Wash-
ington, D.C.: U.S. Committee for Refugees, 1986. Pamphlet describing the
asylum process, with an analysis of growing restrictiveness of U.S. policies.
It recommends that Congress play a greater role in ending programs de-
signed to deter people from seeking asylum in the United States.
Yarnold, Barbara M. Refugees Without Refuge: Formation and Failed Implementa-
tion of U.S. Political Asylum Policy in the 1980’s. Lanham, Md.: University
Press of America, 1990. Scholarly analysis of U.S. policies which finds bias
and a failure to implement the Refugee Act. Examines nongovernmental
groups which have represented refugees. Concludes that nongovernmen-
tal groups have enjoyed success in widening availability of asylum. Tables
and appendices report interesting data.
Zolberg, Aristide R., and Peter M. Benda, eds. Global Migrants, Global Refugees:
Problems and Solutions. New York: Berghahn Books, 2001. Collection of arti-
cles on international dimensions of refugee policies.
See also Cuban refugee policy; Haitian boat people; Refugee fatigue; Ref-
ugee Relief Act of 1953; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
315
History of U.S. immigration
History of U.S.
immigration
Definition: Survey of immigration in American history
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Demographics; European immi-

grants; Irish immigrants
Significance: Immigration to the North American continent began during

the early sixteenth century, when settlers from the British Isles established
the dominant culture of what is now the United States. Immigrants who
have arrived since then have faced conflict and discrimination before be-
ing accepted into American society.
The movement of people from Europe to the Americas began at the end of
the fifteenth century with the urge to explore new lands and to take their
riches back to the Old World. The desire to settle permanently in the Ameri-
cas was caused by upheavals in European society that saw a doubling of the
population, battles over agricultural land, and the Industrial Revolution,
which threw craftspeople and artisans out of work. While some immigrants
came to escape religious persecution, most came with the hope of bettering
their economic position. The labor of these immigrants made possible the
development of the United States as an industrial nation.
British Dominance The dominant culture of the early colonies in North

America was established by immigrants from the British Isles, and this cul-
tural tradition still prevails in American life. Nevertheless, it was the Spanish
who achieved the first permanent settlement, founding St. Augustine (in
what is now Florida) in 1565. Other early Spanish settlements included Santa
Fe (now New Mexico) and the missions in California founded by Father
Junípero Serra.
The Spanish political role in early American life ended with the cession of
part of Florida to the British in 1763, the return of Louisiana to the French in
1800, a treaty that ceded the remainder of Florida to the United States in
1819, and Mexican independence from Spain in 1821. Yet these early settle-
ments, combined with twentieth century immigration from Mexico, Latin
America, and the Caribbean, continue to influence American culture. Span-
ish is the second most frequently spoken language in the United States.
The Virginia colonies in 1607 were the first British settlements in North
America. The British immediately saw the need for laborers to develop the
new land. They considered American Indians (the Indian population in the
seventeenth century has been estimated at from four to eight million) to be
an inferior race. Whereas the Spanish colonists had attempted to integrate
316
the American Indians into the life of their settlements (while exploiting their
labor), the British colonists first tried, unsuccessfully, to use them as slave la-
bor, then forced them to move off whatever land the colonists wanted for
themselves. Through the years, the Indian population was reduced by war
and European diseases. A large number of immigrants in the seventeenth
century came from the British Isles as indentured servants or convicts. These
immigrants usually were assimilated into the general population after their
servitude, often prospering in their own enterprises.
African Immigrants Black explorers had accompanied the French and

Spanish during early explorations of the North American continent. Land-
owners in the West Indies had been importing slaves from Africa to work on
their plantations for many years before the first Africans were brought to the
Virginia colony in 1619. Slavery quickly took hold in America as the solution
to the insatiable demand for labor to develop the new land, especially in the
South with its economy based on rice, indigo, and tobacco.
Immigration inspectors examining the eyes of European immigrants passing through Ellis Island dur-
ing the early twentieth century. Between 1892 and 1954, most of the immigrants to the United
States from Europe arrived by ship and passed through Ellis Island. The development of inexpen-
sive transatlantic air traffic was one of the reasons Ellis Island was closed as a reception center. (Li-
brary of Congress)
317
Estimates of the numbers of slaves who survived the brutal conditions of

the Atlantic passage in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries range from
hundreds of thousands to millions. This forced migration constituted one of
the largest population movements in the history of the world.
Nineteenth Century Immigration Emigration from Europe in the sev-

enteenth and eighteenth centuries was stimulated by political and economic
forces that had been building for hundreds of years. Early settlers in addition
to the British included significant numbers of Dutch and French people. The
voyage by sailing ship, which could take from one to three months, was
fraught with hardship—disease, overcrowding, and deprivation of food and
water. Nevertheless, the population of the colonies was approximately 2.5
million by the beginning of the Revolutionary War. By the early eighteenth
century, most Americans were native born.
The greatest wave of immigrants, an estimated thirty million, came from
Europe between 1815 and World War I. During the mid-nineteenth century,
the Irish, victims of British land laws and several years’ failure of the potato
crop, became the largest group of immigrants. The second-largest group,
German middle-class artisans and landless peasants, came as a result of an
increase in population and the upheaval of the Industrial Revolution. Oth-
ers emigrated from Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the
Scandinavian countries. Ellis
Island in New York was the
port of entry for most immi-
grants from 1892 until 1954.
On the West Coast, an esti-
mated 100,000 Chinese labor-
ers were imported. These im-
migrants, considered a threat
by native workers, were often
treated like slaves. Between
1890 and 1924, a wave of im-
migrants began coming from
Italy, eastern and central Eu-
rope, and Russia. A number
of European Jews also came to
escape religious persecution.
Smaller groups came from the
Balkan countries and the Mid-
dle East. These people, with
different appearances and cus-
British cartoon from about 1912 lampooning American toms, were not as easily assim-
hypocrisy in criticizing Russian exclusion of Jewish Ameri- ilated as had been the people
can immigrants at the same time the United States had a of western or northern Eu-
law excluding Chinese immigration. (Library of Congress) rope.
318
Twentieth Century Immigration Until the early twentieth century, the

United States government welcomed most newcomers. While some local and
state laws restricted the entry of lunatics, the illiterate, anarchists, or people
with communicable diseases, there was little regulation of immigration, apart
from the federal Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. The late nineteenth century,
however, saw an upsurge of demands for restrictive legislation born of the
fear that the quality of American life was being eroded by the newcomers.
During the early 1920’s, in response to this fear, the federal government be-
gan to regulate immigration.
There was little immigration during the Great Depression of the 1930’s.
Following World War II, however, and in the years since, a new wave of immi-
grants has come to the United States, many of them from Asia, Mexico, the
Caribbean, and South America. According to one estimate, by 1990, 6 per-
cent of the population of the United States had been born in a foreign coun-
try. The increasing entrance of unknown numbers of undocumented immi-
grants since the 1970’s had, by the late 1980’s, created a sentiment for new
restrictive legislation.
Ethnic and Racial Conflict The history of immigration to the United

States is, in many ways, a record of ethnic and racial conflict. Almost all new
immigrant groups have faced a degree of resistance, ranging from quiet dis-
approval to blatant discrimination and violence, before being accepted as
part of the American population. History books have traditionally romanti-
cized the idea of the American “melting pot” in which the cultures of all eth-
nic groups combine into a new, unique American culture. More recently,
however, many scholars have argued that becoming an American essentially
entails adopting the ways of a dominant culture that is strongly based on
Anglo-Saxon traditions and ideals; this phenomenon of adaptation has been
termed “Anglo-conformity.” Nevertheless, immigrant groups have affected
the culture of the United States in many ways, great and small.
As for the immigrants themselves, far from being the poor and oppressed
people celebrated in myth and poetry, most were healthy, ambitious young
men and women. The weak and hopeless did not have the necessary energy
to pull up stakes and take the risks required to start again in a new land. Iden-
tifying with their national origins and seeking to protect their own traditions,
these immigrant groups often struggled against one another and against the
larger society to find a place in American society.
Immigrants during the colonial period, faced with immediate threats to
their survival on the frontier and the backbreaking labor needed to develop
the land, apparently gave little heed to ethnic identification or cultural differ-
ence. These early settlers (disregarding the fact that people were already liv-
ing there) believed that divine providence had given them this new land, and
they achieved a political unity that welcomed newcomers. During the late
eighteenth century, however, Congress, fearing foreign-born political dissi-
dents, passed the short-lived Alien Act in 1798 to expel suspected foreign
319
President Lyndon B . Johnson signing the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which substan-
tially changed U.S . immigration policy toward non-Europeans. Johnson made a point of signing
the legislation near the base of the Statue of Liberty, which has always stood as a symbol of wel-
come to immigrants. Lower Manhattan can be seen in the background. (LBJ Library Collection/
Yoichi R. Okamoto)
spies. Although local and state controls on immigration had attempted to

prohibit “undesirables” from entering, the first major federal immigration
legislation excluded prostitutes and convicts in 1875.
Nativism, a political and social movement that pits native-born Americans
(themselves descendants of earlier immigrants) against newer arrivals, has
been a persistent theme in American history. The movement was particularly
strong during the mid-nineteenth century during the massive influx of Irish
Catholics escaping famine in Europe. These Irish immigrants were perse-
cuted by native Protestants fearing political domination by the Roman Catho-
lic pope.
These religious quarrels often ended in violence. In Charlestown, Massa-
chusetts, in 1834, a mob burned the Ursuline convent in the belief that the
nuns had kidnapped young women and were forcing them into the Roman
Catholic sisterhood. In 1844 a series of riots in Philadelphia between Catholic
and Protestant workers left many dead and injured and resulted in extensive
destruction of property. This xenophobia, directed against the Germans and
other “foreigners” as well as the Irish, culminated in formation of the Know-
Nothing Party, a political organization that attempted to influence the elec-
tions of 1854 and 1855 but ultimately declined as the nation headed toward
civil war.
320
Anti-Asian Discrimination On the West Coast, a similar pattern of perse-

cution was directed against Asians. Chinese immigrants began coming dur-
ing the gold rush of 1848. Unlike the Irish, who immigrated in family groups,
most Chinese were men who did not plan to stay; they intended to make
money and return to their homeland. Chinese workers were employed by the
thousands in building the railroads, as well as on farms and in many menial
occupations. Bigotry against the Chinese took many forms, including broad
accusations of vice and idolatry. Considered inferior and a threat to native-
born Americans, Asians became the target of increasing resentment and vio-
lence. In 1882 the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress; it remained
in force until 1943.
Japanese immigrants began to enter the United States during the early
twentieth century and were blamed for taking away jobs by providing cheap
labor. A “gentlemen’s agreement” between the governments of Japan and the
United States in 1907 limited the number of Japanese immigrants. By 1924
all Asians were excluded from entering the United States. Discrimination
against Asians after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 resulted in
the unconstitutional internment of more than 100,000 Japanese Americans,
most of them citizens, and the confiscation of their property. In 1988 Con-
gress offered an apology and partial financial restitution to the families of
these Japanese Americans.
Late Twentieth Century Blacklash A new form of nativism intensi-

fied during the 1980’s and 1990’s, based on the realization that there was a
large and increasing population of undocumented immigrants, most of whom
had entered or were remaining in the United States illegally. The majority of
these undocumented immigrants were from Mexico, but there were also
many from Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. The problem, many peo-
ple began to believe, was that these workers and their families were taking
jobs away from American citizens and were placing a financial strain on gov-
ernment educational and welfare programs.
The economic downturn of the late 1980’s deepened such concerns. Con-
siderable debate occurred concerning the reality or fantasy of this “threat”
and concerning the actual costs versus benefits of the undocumented popula-
tion; it was noted, for example, that many do pay taxes and that many per-
form jobs that most native-born Americans do not want.
Immigrant Adjustments Immigrants to the United States, despite their

many cultural differences, have shared the common experience of being up-
rooted from their familiar ways of life and of having to adjust to the lifeways of
a new culture. As these immigrants become assimilated, they begin to think of
themselves as Americans; ironically, members of assimilated groups may then
begin to distrust more recent immigrant groups as being threats to the “Ameri-
can way of life” to which the older immigrants feel they belong. The tradi-
tional pattern of assimilation is for first-generation immigrants to begin at the
321
bottom of the economic ladder and work their way upward. They often settle
in ethnic neighborhoods and continue to speak their native language. The
second generation, having been educated in the public schools, tends to re-
ject the “foreign” language and customs of their parents. Members of the
third generation often return to their heritage, seeking both to be accultur-
ated Americans and to recover their roots.
The most glaring exception to this pattern has been the lack of true assimi-
lation of African Americans. Because they were brought involuntarily to the
United States and because the vast majority lived in slavery for more than
three hundred years, they have faced unique handicaps. Following the Civil
War, African Americans in the South experienced a brief period of political
power during Reconstruction, but the backlash of the white supremacy move-
ment put an end to this hope. The rise of the terrorist Ku Klux Klan, voting re-
strictions that kept African Americans from voting, Jim Crow segregation
laws, and a Supreme Court decision that gave approval to segregated facilities
(Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896) were among the factors that stood in the way of assim-
ilation following slavery. Slavery has left a legacy that still haunts the social,
political, and cultural life of the United States.
Several social and political movements during the late nineteenth century
created a national demand to restrict immigration. Nativism was strong; the
Ku Klux Klan’s activities were directed against “foreigners” as well as against
African Americans. The fact that the appearance and customs of eastern and
southern Europeans were different from other European Americans made
them easy to identify, and this made them easy targets for discrimination. So-
called scientific theories about race were prevalent among white Europeans
and Americans at the time, and these theories assumed the superiority of
Anglo-Saxon and Nordic peoples. This belief led to the eugenics movement.
Racial purity was believed to be desirable, and there was a fear that “inferior”
races would breed with the native-born European Americans and would lead
to a morally debased American population.
In the Immigration Act of 1924, Congress established quotas for immi-
grants based on a complex set of rules about national origin, favoring north-
ern Europeans. The first significant deviation from this policy came when
President Harry S. Truman used his executive powers to grant asylum to Eu-
ropean refugees fleeing World War II. The McCarran-Walter Act (the Immi-
gration and Nationality Act of 1952) revised the quota system used to deter-
mine immigration; it maintained the exclusion of immigration from Asia.
The Immigration Act of 1965 finally ended the system of quotas based on na-
tional origin.
Marjorie J. Podolsky
Further Reading
versity of California Press, 2004. Collection of firsthand accounts of mod-
ern immigrants from many nations.
322

parative study of the different challenges faced during the peak era of im-
migration to the United States by members of eight major immigrant
groups: the Irish, Germans, Scandinavians and Finns, eastern European
Jews, Italians, Poles and Hungarians, Chinese, and Mexicans.
Houle, Michelle E., ed. Immigration. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Col-
lection of speeches on U.S. immigration policies by such historical figures
as Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy,
and Bill Clinton.
Roleff, Tamara, ed. Immigration. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Collec-
tion of articles arguing opposing viewpoints on different aspects of immi-
gration, such as quotas and restrictions, revolving around questions of
whether immigrants have a positive or negative impact on the United
States.
Sandler, Martin W. Island of Hope: The Story of Ellis Island and the Journey to Amer-
ica. New York: Scholastic, 2004. History of the most important immigrant
reception, from 1892 through 1954. Written for younger readers.
migrant, 1897-1933. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI, 2001. Study of the role of U.S.
presidents in American immigration policy through an era of heavy Euro-
pean immigration and fundamental changes in American immigration
policy.
haven Press, 2004. Various social, political, and legal viewpoints are given
by experts and observers familiar with immigration into the United States.

1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; Illegal aliens; Immigration and Nat-
uralization Service; Immigration “crisis”; Immigration law; Justice and immi-
gration; Migration; Push and pull factors; Undocumented workers.
323
Hmong immigrants
Hmong immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from a minority community
living in several Southeast Asian nations
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics; Refugees
Significance: Laotian mountain tribespeople from a preliterate society

experienced culture shock when they migrated to the United States as
refugees, beginning in 1976. Their adjustment difficulties contradict the
stereotype of Asian Americans as a highly educated, successful “model mi-
nority.”
The Hmong (pronounced “mong”) people have a long history of escaping

adversity. For centuries the Hmong were an ethnic group persecuted in
China. During the early nineteenth century, they moved to Burma (Myan-
mar), Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos. In Laos, the Hmong settled in the iso-
lated highlands. During the political turmoil of the 1950’s and 1960’s, many
Hmong fought for the anticommunist army under General Vang Pao. The
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) secretly ran and financed this Viet-
nam War effort in which Laotian men served in rescue missions and guerrilla
operations. When the communists took power in Laos in 1975 and the United
States withdrew, there were reprisals against the Hmong. To escape persecu-
tion, many Hmong fled to United Nations refugee camps in Thailand. In Ban
Vinai and other refugee camps, Hmong families waited to establish political
refugee status so that they could emigrate to the United States.
Refugees on the Move The first Hmong refugees arrived in the United
States in 1976, assisted by world relief organizations and local organizations
such as churches. Between 1976 and 1991, an estimated 100,000 Hmong
came to the United States. Because of their high birthrate, the population in-
creased substantially. The Hmong dispersed throughout the United States,
settling wherever sponsors could be found. The Hmong later followed a sec-
ondary migration pattern within the United States, moving to concentrations
in California, Minnesota, Montana, Wisconsin, Colorado, Washington,
North Carolina, and Rhode Island.
Areas of second settlement were selected based on climate, cheap housing,
job availability, state welfare programs, and family unification. During the
early 1990’s, Fresno County, California, had the largest settlement, followed
by the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. The reception the Hmong re-
ceived varied from hearty welcome to ethnic antagonism on the part of some
Americans who were ignorant of Hmong bravery and sacrifices in the Viet-
nam War and who did not grasp the difficulty of Hmong adjustment to life in
the United States.
324
Hmong immigrants
Culture Shock Three branches of the Hmong came to the United States:
the Blue Hmong, the White Hmong, and the Striped Hmong. They spoke dif-
ferent dialects and wore distinct traditional clothing but shared many cul-
tural traditions that made it difficult to adjust to life in a modern society. Most
refugees had never experienced indoor plumbing, electricity, or automobiles.
For many Hmong, their only work experience before coming to the United
States was as soldiers and as farmers. The traditional crops of rice and corn
were raised on fields so steep that sometimes farmers tethered themselves to a
stump to keep from falling off their fields. For the Hmong who tried farming
in the United States, adjustment was difficult. Their slash-and-burn method
of clearing land was not permitted. They were unfamiliar with pesticides and
chemical fertilizers. Refugees worked as migrant farmworkers and in many
low-paid urban positions that did not require English proficiency. The unem-
ployment rate was very high for many Hmong communities. In 1988, 70 per-
cent of the Fresno Hmong depended on welfare and refugee assistance.
Education was another area of difficult cultural adaptation. During the
1990’s, many Hmong children struggled in U.S. schools. Many attended
English-as-a-second-language classes, and many were placed in vocational
tracks. Hmong children often had low scores on standardized tests of vocabu-
lary and reading comprehension. When large numbers of Hmong children
entered certain school systems during the late 1970’s and 1980’s, administra-
tors and teachers were completely unprepared. Learning English proved
difficult, especially for the older
Hmong who had never attended
school in Laos. Special training
programs first taught Hmong lan-
guage literacy, then English.
Hmong beliefs about religion
and medicine are very different
from common attitudes in the
United States. Traditional Hmong
religion is a form of animism, a
belief that spirits dwell in all things,
including the earth, the sky, and
animals. Hmong attempted to pla- Image Not Available
cate these spirits in religious ritu-
als that often included animal sac-
rifice. In medical ceremonies, a
shaman or healer tried to locate
and bring back the patient’s run-
away soul. Many bereaved Hmong
refused autopsies, believing they
interfered with reincarnation.
Hmong family traditions often
put them at odds with U.S. cul-
325
Hmong immigrants
ture. The Laotian practice was to arrange marriages, usually interclan agree-
ments in which a bride price was paid. Women married as teenagers, then de-
rived their status from being a wife and mother of many children. Marriage by
capture was part of Hmong tradition but led to U.S. criminal charges of kid-
napping and rape. Divorce was discouraged but possible in Laos, and chil-
dren could be kept by the husband’s family. Such practices conflict with many
U.S. laws and folkways.
Other conflicts arose over U.S. laws that the Hmong did not understand.
Carrying concealed weapons was common in Laos but led to arrest in the
United States. Zoning laws stipulating where to build a house or plant a field
were unfamiliar to the Hmong. Disputes arose over Hmong poaching in wild-
life refuges.
Culture shock seems to have taken a toll on the Hmong. During the 1970’s
and early 1980’s, many apparently healthy Hmong men died in their sleep in
what was labeled Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome. Possible explana-
tions were depression, “survivor guilt,” and the stress of a new environment in
which the men lacked control of their lives. The peak years for the syndrome
were 1981 and 1982.
Strengths of the Hmong Not all aspects of Hmong tradition handi-

capped their adjustment to life in the United States. Some members possess
fine-motor skills honed in their intricate needlework. Without sewing ma-
chines or patterns, Hmong women embroider and appliqué to produce mar-
ketable products that also preserve their cultural memories. Flower cloths are
square designs with symmetrical patterns. Story cloths are sewn pictures de-
picting past events, including war brutality and refugee camp life. Hmong de-
veloped memorization skills as part of their oral tradition of elaborate folk-
tales. Hmong women are credited with admirable parenting skills, especially
in their sensitivity to their children’s needs. The Hmong typically possess a
fierce independence and will to survive.
The Hmong appear to be adjusting to the new culture in which they find
themselves, especially the younger generation. Hmong youth typically adopt
American ways, wearing Western dress and enjoying rock music and video
games. The group shows resilience in adapting traditions to changed circum-
stances. The Hmong have devised a custom of group support as clans form
communities for mutual aid. Seamstresses have adapted their needlework
patterns to satisfy Western markets. Crowded city dwellers often plant im-
promptu gardens in the narrow spaces between buildings.
Nancy Conn Terjesen
Further Reading I Begin My Life All Over: The Hmong and the American Im-
migrant Experience, by Lillian Faderman with Ghia Xiong (Boston: Beacon,
1998), combines thirty-five narratives and emphasizes generational differ-
ences. Another collection of Hmong immigrant narratives is Sue Murphy
Mote’s Hmong and American: Stories of Transition to a Strange Land (Jefferson,
326
Homeland Security Department
N.C.: McFarland, 2004). For a recent account of the plight of Hmong refu-
gees, see Linda Barr’s Long Road to Freedom: Journey of the Hmong (Blooming-
ton, Minn.: Red Brick Learning, 2004). Anne Fadiman’s The Spirit Catches You
and You Fall Down: A Hmong Child, Her American Doctors, and the Collision of Two
Cultures (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1997) looks at how cultural dif-
ferences affected the treatment of a young epileptic Hmong American girl.
Wendy Walker-Moffat’s The Other Side of the Asian American Success Story (San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995) is a research report explaining negative educa-
tional experiences. Spencer Sherman’s “The Hmong in America: Laotian
Refugees in the Land of the Giants,” in National Geographic (October, 1988),
describes communities in North Carolina and California. Ronald Takaki’s
Strangers from a Different Shore: History of Asian Americans (Boston: Little,
Brown, 1989) includes a chapter on post-1965 immigrants. Lan Cao and
Himilce Novas use a question-answer format to describe seven nationalities in
Everything You Need to Know About Asian American History (New York: Plume,
2004). Julie Keown-Bomar’s Kinship Networks Among Hmong-American Refugees
(New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2004) is a sociological study of
Hmong immigrants.
See also Asian American education; Asian American stereotypes; Asian

American women; Model minorities; Southeast Asian immigrants; Vietnam-
ese immigrants.
Homeland Security
Department
Identification: Federal cabinet-level department that coordinates the work
of twenty-two separate agencies, including those overseeing immigration
law
Date: Established on March 1, 2003
Immigration issues: Border control; Illegal immigration; Law enforcement
Significance: Created in the aftermath of terrorist attacks on the United

States, the Homeland Security Department encourages active communica-
tion and collaboration among its numerous agencies and organizations to
meet the department’s primary goal of improving the security of the
United States against possible terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in New York City, Washing-
ton, D.C., and Pennsylvania, a massive reorganization of 180,000 federal
employees from twenty-two different agencies was proposed by President
327
Dust clouds enveloping Lower Manhattan after the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on
September 11, 2001. (www.bigfoto.com)
George W. Bush and authorized by the Homeland Security Act of 2002. This
controversial restructuring unified a sprawling federal network of institu-
tions and organizations into the Homeland Security Department in order
better to protect against terrorist threats, as well as natural and accidental di-
sasters throughout the United States and its territories. The enormous con-
solidation merged major agencies such as the U.S. Border Patrol, Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service, Secret Service, Coast Guard, Customs Service,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Transportation
Security Administration under a single cabinet-level department on March 1,
2003.
With a proposed budget in 2005 of more than $40 billion, the department
was tasked with overseeing and managing the daily operations of protecting
national targets, coordinating domestic intelligence, preparedness, and re-
search initiatives, and monitoring the flow of trade and legal immigration
across all U.S. ports of entry. Agencies in the Homeland Security Department
are divided among four major divisions: Border and Transportation Security,
Emergency Preparedness and Response, Science and Technology, and Infor-
mation Analysis and Infrastructure Protection.
Borders, Transportation, and Security The Homeland Security De-

partment’s Border and Transportation directorate oversees security and man-
agement of immigration, borders, and transportation operations in the United
States. Its U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services branch (USCIS) pro-
vides all services and benefits relating to immigration. Customs and Border
328
Protection (CBP) serves as the enforcement agency and oversees the legal en-
try of goods, services, and persons into and out of ports of entry.
The Federal Protective Service is charged with protecting all federal build-
ings and installations. Another major responsibility of this directorate in-
cludes the monitoring of transportation systems by the Transportation Secu-
rity Administration (TSA). With an estimated 11 million trucks, 2 million
road cars, and 55,000 calls on ports per year, the TSA has the enormous task
of protecting and monitoring all forms of transit, including airports across
the country. Also working closely with other agencies in this directorate are
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the Office of Domestic Pre-
paredness, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC).
The federal Emergency Preparedness and Response directorate combines
agencies from the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services
with FEMA. These agencies now collectively deal with emergency disaster
planning and response. Through grants provided to state and local response
personnel such as police, fire, rescue, and medical response teams, this divi-
sion ensures adequate training, equipment, and planning for emergencies.
A central component of preparedness planning involves coordinating
large-scale hypothetical disaster drills across communities to test their readi-
ness for nuclear, biological, and attacks with weapons of mass destruction.
Other agencies under this directorate focus on the stockpiling of drugs to
treat biochemical assaults and training medical workers on how to treat vic-
tims. Domestic Emergency Response Teams and the National Domestic Pre-
paredness Office work with FEMA and other agencies to develop comprehen-
sive strategies for planning, prevention, response and recovery from acts of
terrorism and to assist when natural disasters strike.
Scientific Advancement and Threat Assessment All available techno-

logical and scientific antiterrorism groups across the federal government
were combined under the Science and Technology directorate of the Home-
land Security Department. These organizations work together and provide
states with federal guidelines regarding responses to weapons of mass de-
struction. By merging resources, labs, and scientific knowledge formerly scat-
tered across the Departments of Energy, Agriculture, and Defense, the Home-
land Security Department tries to assist local and state public safety officials
develop sound plans to monitor and defend their communities.
The final group included in the Homeland Security Department is that of
the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection directorate. Its agen-
cies gather and analyze information from many national agencies and then is-
sue threat assessment warnings to U.S. citizens and targets. The Homeland
Security Advisory System issues these warnings to specific and general targets
and encourages continuous public vigilance. The Advisory System also pro-
vides information to local and state authorities, the private sector, and inter-
national partners as intelligence is received.
A color-coded threat level system is used to communicate the perceived
329
danger to the public and has been activated when threats have been discov-
ered. These warnings attempt to protect important infrastructure systems
that are most prone to attack, including food, water, health, emergency, and
telecommunications systems. Using a federal television campaign, the Home-
land Security Department has also encouraged Americans to make family
emergency plans in the case of a terrorist attack or natural disaster.
Additional Agencies and Initiatives In addition to Homeland Security

Department’s four directories, the U.S. Coast Guard and Secret Service are
also part of the Homeland Security Department. The Coast Guard monitors
the coastal and interstate waters of the U.S. and its territories, assists other
agencies in the prevention of the illegal entry of aliens and contraband, and
provides rescue missions and aid to vessels in distress.
The Secret Service also remains intact under the Homeland Security De-
partment and reports directly to the secretary of Homeland Security. First es-
tablished in 1865, the Secret Service was initially created to protect against
counterfeit currency. Perhaps the service’s most visible role includes its re-
sponsibility for protecting former, current, and elected presidents, vice presi-
dents, and their immediate families. The service also protects major political
candidates, visiting diplomats, and other high-ranking government officials.
The Secret Service Uniformed Division has also guarded the grounds of the
White House since 1922. Other initiatives of the department focus on poten-
tial threats to banking and finance systems, health and safety of citizens, and
the monitoring of potential targets and intelligence across the world.
In an attempt expand collaboration among federal, state, and local gov-
ernments, as well as organizations in the private sector, the Homeland Secu-
rity Department is building a coalition of organizations that are linked to-
gether by a computer-based counterterrorism communications network. In
2005, the Homeland Security Information Network linked agencies in more
than fifty major cities, all fifty states, Washington, D.C. and five U.S. territo-
ries through a state-of-the-art computer communication system. This system
relays sensitive, nonclassified information to more than one hundred different
agencies and approximately one thousand users who share a joint counter-
terrorism mission.
Future expansion of this project targets including smaller agencies at
county levels and private businesses and sharing classified information among
cleared parties. This system aims to offer real-time information across geo-
graphical regions and between public and private sectors in order better to
identify, share, and respond to terrorist threats.
Future Challenges With the massive integration of numerous agen-

cies across departments, the transition of key personnel, services, and cross-
authorized duties has not been accomplished without difficulties. Audits of
the department’s financial statements are used to determine what corrective
measures are necessary to streamline government spending and identify po-
330
tential wastes of taxpayer funds. Dramatic changes within the agencies con-
solidated into the department are expected to continue as the agencies are
studied and redundant jobs and assignments are eliminated. Budgetary and
human resource management has been a critical area of concern from the in-
ception of the integration of so many independent agencies under one um-
brella department.
The changing of employee benefits, the cutting of automatic overtime pay
for personnel, the elimination of seniority and rank for those persons being
adopted into new agencies, and the potential loss of trained employees to
the private sector are all challenging issues that the department will address
in the years to come. With so many important responsibilities concerning
national defense, homeland security, disaster preparedness, and transporta-
tion and border protections resting on the shoulders of the Homeland Secu-
rity Department, this fledgling department is expected to remain in the pub-
lic eye and front and center on the war on terrorism in post-September 11
America.
Denise Paquette Boots
Further Reading
Brzezinski, Matthew. Fortress America: On the Frontline of Homeland Security—An
Inside Look at the Coming Surveillance State. New York: Bantam Books, 2004.
Offering both hypothetical and real stories about the war on terror since
September 11, 2001, this book takes a critical look at the Department of
Homeland Security, the sacrificing of civil liberties, and damage done to
international alliances.
War on Terrorism. New York: New Press/W. W. Norton, 2003. Critical analy-
sis of the erosion of civil liberties in the United States since September 11,
2001, with attention to the impact of federal policies on immigrants and
visiting aliens.
Flynn, Stephen. America the Vulnerable: How Our Government Is Failing to Protect
Us. New York: HarperCollins, 2004. A former Coast Guard commander of-
fers compelling evidence of the continued threats to soft and hard targets
in the United States and argues that much more should be done by the
government and private sector to fight against terrorists.
Jacobs, Nancy R. Immigration: Looking for a New Home. Detroit: Gale Group,
2000. Broad discussion of modern federal government immigration poli-
cies that considers all sides of the debates about the rights of illegal aliens.
Kettl, Donald F., ed. The Department of Homeland Security’s First Year: A Report
Card. New York: Century Foundation Books, 2004. This directory offers
job descriptions in depth that are available through Homeland Security. It
also includes relevant Web sites, phone contacts, hiring information, and
advice for interviewing and preparing for a variety of careers through the
Homeland Security Department.
331
Hull-House
Lynch, James P., and Rita J. Simon. Immigration the World Over: Statutes, Policies,
and Practices. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002. International per-
spectives on immigration, with particular attention to the immigration
policies of the United States, Canada, Australia, Great Britain, France, Ger-
many, and Japan.
Mena, Jesus. Homeland Security: Techniques and Technologies. Hingham, Mass.:
Charles River Media, 2004. Examination of the efforts related to cyber-
terrorism and what systems and artificial intelligence are used to aggre-
gate, integrate, and assimilate data that is integral to business, govern-
ment, and individuals.
Staeger, Rob. Deported Aliens. Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004. Up-to-date anal-
ysis of the treatment of undocumented immigrants in the United States
since the 1960’s, with particular attention to issues relating to deportation.
White, Jonathan R. Defending the Homeland: Domestic Intelligence Law Enforce-
ment and Security. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2003. Law-enforcement per-
spective that details how the criminal justice system has changed since Sep-
tember 11.
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Coast Guard, U.S.; Illegal aliens; Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service; September 11 terrorist attacks.
Hull-House
Identification: Settlement house founded by Jane Addams and Ellen Gates
Starr
Date: Established in September, 1889
Place: Chicago, Illinois
Immigration issues: Families and marriage; Women
Significance: Hull-House represented an attempt on behalf of middle-class

American women to address the needs of Chicago’s inner city, many of
whose residents were poor immigrants.
Inspired by Toynbee House in London, Jane Addams and Ellen Gates Starr
purchased a dilapidated mansion on South Halsted in Chicago and created
Hull-House. Addams and Starr believed that the urban poor, particularly im-
migrants, had been victimized by industrialization. Consequently, they tried
to improve their lot by providing a variety of services, including English
classes, a day nursery for working mothers, a kindergarten, an employment
bureau, and a health class. Hull-House soon became the best-known settle-
ment house in the United States. Addams also advocated specific legal re-
332
Hull-House
Hull-House. (University of Illinois at Chicago, University Library, Jane Addams Memorial Collec-
tion)
forms, such as a juvenile court system, workers’ compensation laws, and child
labor legislation. However, she ran afoul of machine politics and urban bosses
who saw settlement house workers as a threat to their own power.
From its inception, Hull-House was an endeavor geared primarily to meet
women’s needs. Addams conformed to nineteenth century gender roles, in
that she saw women as natural nurturers. Consequently, she shaped Hull-
House’s outreach to reflect this perception. The settlement house attracted
numerous individuals as volunteers, especially educated, middle-class women
who were interested in helping slum dwellers. Likewise, Hull-House provided
an outlet for their benevolent impulses and served as a harbinger for later
Progressive Era reform and regulation.
Keith Harper
Further Reading
Addams, Jane. The Jane Addams Reader. Edited by Jean Bethke Elshtain. New
York: Basic Books, 2002. Selection of writings by Jane Addams, the founder
of Hull-House.
____________. Twenty Years at Hull House. Edited by Victoria Bissell Brown.
Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. Scholarly edition, with additional au-
tobiographical materials, of a book that Addams first published in 1911.
Provides detailed account of the establishment, operation, and philosophy
of Hull-House.
333
Illegal aliens
Bryan, Mary Lynn McCree, and Allen Davis, eds. One Hundred Years at Hull-
House. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990. A compendium of
primary sources about Hull-House, including numerous photographs.
Carson, Mina. Settlement Folk: Social Thought and the American Settlement Move-
ment, 1885-1930. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. An exten-
sively documented examination of the contribution of U.S. settlement-
house workers to the development of social welfare. Provides a historical
and ideological context for the work of Hull-House.
Deegan, Mary Jo. Race, Hull-House, and the University of Chicago: A New Con-
science Against Ancient Evils. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2002. Study of Hull-
House, from 1892 to 1960, in the context of racial and ethnic issues.
Glowacki, Peggy, and Julia Hendry. Hull-House. Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia,
2004. Well-illustrated study of Hull-House, which is discussed in the con-
text of its surrounding community.
See also Machine politics; Settlement house movement; Women immi-

grants.
Illegal aliens
Definition: Colloquial term for foreign-born persons who enter the United
States without legal authorization and those who enter legally but violate
the terms of their admission or fail to acquire permanent residence status
Immigration issues: Border control; Economics; Illegal immigration; Law

enforcement; Mexican immigrants
Significance: The steady increase in the population of undocumented aliens

in the United States presents a variety of challenges to the American crimi-
nal justice system. In addition to the federal government’s monumental
problem of enforcing the nation’s immigration laws, state and local law-
enforcement agencies face a growing problem of criminal activities by ille-
gal aliens.
In 1994, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) produced

the first detailed national estimates of the numbers of illegal aliens in the
United States. The INS estimated that 3.4 million unauthorized residents
were in the country in October, 1992. Later, the INS estimated the number to
be about 7 million in the year 2000. The U.S. Census Bureau’s estimate for
that same year 8 million. Since the early 1990’s, the annual growth rate of the
illegal alien population has ranged between 350,000 and 500,000. At that
rate, the number of illegal residents in the United States was about 9 million
334
Illegal aliens
in 2004. That figure is roughly equivalent to the combined populations of the

eleven smallest U.S. states, and some researchers believe that the actual num-
ber of illegal aliens is even significantly higher.
The southern neighbor of the United States, Mexico is the single largest
source of illegal immigrants. Of the more than 8 million illegal aliens resid-
ing in the United States in 2004, about 5.3 million—well over half—came
from Mexico. Undocumented Mexican workers in the United States are an
important part of the Mexican national economy. They send home an esti-
mated $20 to $30 billion a year.
An additional 2 million illegal aliens were born in other parts of Latin
America, primarily Central American nations. Taken together, Mexicans and
other Latin Americans make up more than three-fourths of all illegal aliens in
the United States. About 10 percent of illegal aliens originate in Asia, while
Europe and Canada supply about 5 percent. The rest come from Africa and
other parts of the world.
The U.S. Criminal Justice System The standard American response to

illegal immigration has been increased border enforcement through the au-
thority of the federal government. Throughout the 1990’s, the numbers of
both illegal border crossings and illegal aliens in the United States increased
incrementally. Among the strategies to stem illegal immigration were Opera-
tion Gatekeeper in California, Operation Hold-the-Line in Texas, and Opera-
tion Safeguard in Arizona. All were attempts to deter illegal border crossings.
The U.S. Department of Justice allocated unprecedented resources to
these innovative strategies, including additional Border Patrol agents, ad-
vanced computer systems, and improved security fences, lighting, and sup-
port vehicles. As a result, by 1998, the numbers of attempted border crossings
and apprehensions dropped to their lowest levels in almost twenty years.
However, human rights activists and researchers criticized these efforts and
argued that increased surveillance along the border were not preventing ille-
gal entries but were instead forcing undocumented immigrants to seek risk-
ier methods of entering the United States. In response to these charges, U.S.
president George W. Bush and Mexican president Vicente Fox later pledged
to pursue immigration reform policies to address border enforcement and
human rights concerns.
The fact that the terrorist attacks on the United States of September 11,
2001, were perpetrated by illegal aliens made countering illegal immigration
a top priority of the Bush administration. After that date, new federal laws
and policies were adopted, including the Patriot Act of 2001, the Homeland
Security Act of 2002, and the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Re-
form Act of 2002. In March, 2003, the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-
vice was divided into three bureaus within the newly created Department of
Homeland Security: the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE); the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and U.S. Citi-
zenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
335
Illegal aliens
Although the federal government is primarily responsible for securing the

nation’s borders, the impact of illegal aliens on the criminal justice system
reaches far beyond the federal system. Indeed, the problem and its required
solutions may have an even deeper impact on state and local jurisdictions. At
state and local levels, the costs of arresting, prosecuting, sentencing, and su-
pervising illegal aliens who commit criminal offenses have become a major is-
sue. Some states have filed suits to force the federal government to reimburse
them for the costs of criminal justice actions against aliens for whom the fed-
eral government is responsible.
The federal government does reimburse states for some costs associated
with criminal acts by illegal aliens. Section 510 of the Immigration Reform
and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) authorizes the U.S. attorney general to reim-
burse states for the criminal justice costs attributable to undocumented per-
sons. The Bureau of Justice Assistance, a branch of the Office of Justice Pro-
grams, administers the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP), in
conjunction with ICE of the Department of Homeland Security. SCAAP pro-
vides federal payments to states and localities that incur correctional officer
salary costs for incarcerating undocumented aliens who have committed at
least one felony or two misdemeanor convictions for violations of state or lo-
cal law and are incarcerated for at least four consecutive days during a report-
ing period. During the fiscal year 2004, the total appropriation was approxi-
mately $297 million. SCAAP payments are calculated with a formula that
provides pro rata shares of the funds to jurisdictions that apply, based on the
total number of eligible criminal aliens as determined by ICE.
Criminal illegal aliens pose considerable challenges to law-enforcement
efforts in part due to the highly criticized stance of many cities and counties
that have adopted “sanctuary laws.” Such laws are local ordinances adopted
in attempts to reduce victimizations of aliens and to improve crime reporting
rates among immigrant populations. The National Council of La Raza and
other advocacy groups have defended sanctuary laws by arguing that they
promote community-oriented policing efforts and protect against racial pro-
filing, police misconduct, and civil rights violations. Critics against the policy
contend that such laws allow illegal aliens who commit crimes to circumvent
federal law and avoid identification and deportation.
Future Trends The number of illegal aliens residing in the United States
grew steadily throughout the 1990’s. More than half of all unauthorized visi-
tors in the country were born in Mexico. According to the Center for Immi-
gration Studies, about 9 percent of living people born in Mexico now reside
in the United States. Additional resources to deter illegal border crossings as
a result of laws implemented following the September 11, 2001, attacks have
done little to slow the influx of illegal aliens and there is no evidence to sug-
gest that current levels of illegal entry into the United States will decrease sig-
nificantly.
Barring major changes in the nation’s legal immigration policy or enforce-
336
Illegal aliens
ment strategies it is likely that immigration will continue at roughly current

levels. More and more people will continue to enter this country lawfully. At
the same time, however, it can be expected that many will enter the United
States illegally. Controlling the national borders, thwarting organized alien
smuggling rings, and identifying and deporting people who are in the United
States illegally, especially those who commit crimes, will be priorities.
Wayne J. Pitts
Further Reading
Ahmed, Syed Refaat. Forlorn Migrants: An International Legal Regime for Undocu-
mented Migrant Workers. Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press, 2000. An in-
ternational perspective on the problem of illegal immigrants by a Bangla-
deshi scholar.
controversial issues relating to immigration, including laws regulating un-
documented workers.
United States.
Daniels, Roger. Guarding the Golden Door: American Immigration Policy and Immi-
grants Since 1882. New York: Hill & Wang, 2004. Study of the impact of igno-
rance, partisan politics, and unintended consequences in immigration
policy during the post-Nine-Eleven war on terrorism.
Nevins, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the “Illegal Alien” and the Making
of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge, 2002. Critical history of
federal efforts to control the influx of undocumented immigration across
the border with Mexico.
Staeger, Rob. Deported Aliens. Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004. Informative
study of immigration of illegal aliens to the United States and Canada
since the 1960’s, with attention to changes in immigration law.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Analysis of the economic impact of il-
legal immigration in the United States.
337
Immigrant advantage
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Chinese detentions in New York; Coast
Guard, U.S.; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Green cards; Immigration and
Naturalization Service; Immigration “crisis”; Immigration Reform and Con-
trol Act of 1986; Justice and immigration; Operation Wetback; Plyler v. Doe;
Proposition 187; Undocumented workers.
Immigrant advantage
Definition: Sociological term for a set of distinctions among minority
groups that reside within a society and those peoples who immigrate to
these societies voluntarily from other nations
Significance: Immigrant members of ethnic minorities often have advan-

tages over already resident members of their ethnic groups.
Resident minority groups are often “marginalized,” living on the fringe of so-
ciety, often in poverty, lacking education, occupational skills, political power,
or the means to integrate into the mainstream. These marginalized groups,
like the immigrants, are frequently made up of ethnic and racial minorities.
However, compared with marginalized groups, immigrants have numerous
advantages and often become successful, productive members of a society.
One of the primary advantages is that immigrants choose to move to a new
country and are therefore motivated to succeed. Another advantage is that
they often have the resources needed to relocate to a new country. National
immigration services work hard at keeping out low-skilled and poorly edu-
cated immigrants.
A third advantage is that immigrants to the United States tend to believe in
the “great melting pot” ideal and want to join the mainstream society and
learn the new language. To become citizens of the United States, for exam-
ple, immigrants must speak, read, and write English and pass an exam on U.S.
history and government. Therefore, although immigrants may start on the
lowest rungs of the economic ladder, they often move up quickly, unlike
marginalized resident minorities.
Rochelle L. Dalla
Further Reading
Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2001.
nic Minority Policies. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003.
338
Immigration Act of 1917
Jacoby, Tamar, ed. Reinventing the Melting Pot: The New Immigrants and What It
Means to Be American. New York: Basic Books, 2004.
See also Accent discrimination; Chicano movement; Generational accul-

turation; Hansen effect; Machine politics; Naturalization.

The Law: Restrictive federal legislation on immigration
Date: May 1, 1917
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Discrimination; Language; Laws and

treaties; Nativism and racism
Significance: In an effort to exclude as immigrants those of ethnic origin

considered incompatible with the racial stock of the country’s founders,
the U.S. Congress enacted this law to require literacy as a condition of ad-
mission to the United States.
During the late nineteenth century, the U.S. government for the first time be-
gan to accept the responsibility for restricting immigration. As long as there
had been no question that people were welcome to enter and to become citi-
zens of the United States—as had been the case since the American Revolu-
tion—each state was at liberty to regulate the flow of foreign nationals within
its borders. After 1830, however, because of a large increase in the numbers of
immigrants, especially from Catholic Ireland, where famine had motivated
huge numbers to emigrate, a somewhat different public attitude emerged.
It became a matter of public anxiety, especially in the eastern United
States, not only that the increased immigration was likely to create an over-
supply of labor (a major concern of labor unions) but also that there were
many entering the country who were deemed undesirable. Many people
came to believe that laws should be made and enforced that would restrict the
numbers and the kinds of people who would be allowed to enter the United
States. In their party platforms, politicians of the period included promises
to enact laws restricting immigration of criminals, paupers, and contract la-
borers—largely unskilled workers who were promised free transportation to
America contingent upon repayment once admission was obtained and wages
were earned. Others vowed themselves in favor of preventing the United
States from becoming a place where European countries could conveniently
rid themselves of their poor and of their criminal elements and stated their
preference for what they would consider to be worthy and industrious Euro-
peans—to the particular exclusion of laborers from China.
339
Beginning in 1875, numerous acts dealing with the problem of immigra-

tion were passed by Congress. Effective enforcement, however, was the prob-
lem with the earliest provisions for exclusion. Many began to believe that
large numbers of those who were not wanted could be refused admission by
virtue of the fact that they would be unlikely to pass a simple literacy test. A
senator from Massachusetts, Henry Cabot Lodge, was an early and influential
advocate of a literacy test. In one of his congressional speeches, Senator
Lodge proposed to exclude from admission any individual who could neither
read nor write. (Literacy in any language was to be qualifying; knowledge of
English was not to be required.)
It was believed, according to the senator, that the test would prevent immi-
gration of many Italians, Russians, Poles, Hungarians, Greeks, and Asians,
and that it would cause the exclusion of fewer of those who were English-
speaking or who were Germans, Scandinavians, or French. Lodge insisted, in
his argument, that the latter were more closely kin, racially, to those who had
founded and developed the United States, and that therefore they would be
more readily appreciated. (The senator made allowance for the Irish, even
though he saw them as being of different racial stock, because they spoke En-
glish and had been associated with the English peoples for many centuries.)
Lodge further argued that the northern European immigrants were the
ones most likely to move on to the West and South, where population was
needed, whereas the southern Eu-
ropeans—those intended to be ex-
cluded by the test—tended to stay
in the crowded cities of the North
and East, creating slums and plac-
ing a disproportionate financial bur-
den on local charitable institutions.
He categorized as also unlikely to
pass the test those who intended
only temporary stays—those who
came to earn money that would
not be used to further the coun-
try’s development but whose pur-
pose was to work and live in the
poorest of conditions until their
savings were adequate to return to
and to make life better for a family
in their country of origin.
In 1896, a Senate bill that in-
cluded provision for the literacy test
was sponsored by Lodge. The same
Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts bill was introduced in the House
was one of the most outspoken advocates of liter- of Representatives. Congress passed
acy tests for immigrants. (Library of Congress) the bill, but it was vetoed by Presi-
340
dent Grover Cleveland. The House

was able to override the veto, but
the Senate took no action.
In his veto message, President
Cleveland indicated his extreme
displeasure with the intent of the
bill, reminding Congress of the fact
that many of the country’s best cit-
izens had been immigrants who
may have been deemed inferior.
His opinion of the literacy test was
that it would be no true measure of
the quality of an applicant for ad-
mission, and that illiteracy should
not be used as a pretext for exclu-
sion when the real reasons were
obviously different.
The controversy over the liter-
acy test went on for approximately
twenty-five years. Meanwhile, the President Woodrow Wilson, with his second wife,
idea became more popular. In Edith, at his second inauguration in 1917. Wilson
1907, the Joint Commission on Im- twice vetoed the Immigration Act of 1917, only to
migration was funded by Congress see Congress pass it over his objections. (Library of
and charged to investigate U.S. im- Congress)
migration policy. In 1911, the com-
mission released its forty-one-volume report. The literacy test was adopted
as a provision of the Comprehensive Immigration Act of 1917—which was
based primarily on recommendations of the commission—but only after
similar attempts had been vetoed by President William Howard Taft in 1913
and by President Woodrow Wilson in 1915. Wilson twice vetoed the act of
1917 as well, only to have Congress pass it over his objections after his second
veto.
President Wilson argued, in his first veto message to Congress, that the lit-
eracy test was an unprincipled departure from the nation’s policy toward im-
migrants. He expressed concern that the literacy test, rather than being a test
of character or of fitness to immigrate, was instead a penalty for not having
had the opportunity for education and would exclude those who sought that
very opportunity in order to better their circumstances.
The 1917 act provided that all persons seeking admission who were over
sixteen years of age and who were physically capable of reading were to be
tested. Those who were unable to read a few dozen words in some language
were to be excluded from admission as immigrants. There were numerous ex-
ceptions, and in many cases illiteracy could be overlooked. Those seeking es-
cape from religious persecution were excepted, as were those formerly admit-
ted who had resided in the United States for five years and who had then
341
departed but had returned within six months. Illiterate relatives of those pass-
ing the test were admissible if otherwise qualified.
Impact of Event The main objective of the literacy test—to exclude those
of certain ethnic origins or traditions—failed to reduce immigration in gen-
eral and from the countries of southern and eastern Europe in particular.
Other provisions had effectively discouraged emigrant Asians from choosing
the United States as their intended destination. Instead, immigration in-
creased in the four fiscal years that followed enactment of the 1917 law;
1,487,000 applicants were admitted in that period. Of that number, only
6,142 aliens (less than 0.5 percent) were deported for having failed the liter-
acy test. Most of these were from Mexico, French Canada, or Italy.
Case studies of aliens who were unable to pass the literacy test indicate that
humane attempts were made by immigration authorities to ensure that the
1917 law was not cruelly enforced. Admission for a limited period could be
granted, under bond, for those who otherwise qualified but who were unable
to pass the test. Applicants were given a chance to take classes in reading and
writing a language of their choice, and more than one opportunity to pass the
literacy test could be granted for those who appeared capable of sustaining
themselves. Canadian immigration often was the alternative for those whose
cases could justify no further extensions of time in which to pass the test and
for whom deportation was no longer avoidable.
The racist attitudes of leaders such as Lodge were to dominate U.S. immi-
gration policies until much later in the twentieth century, after the United
States had participated in two world wars and after there had been refutation
of earlier studies that attributed superior intellect and character to the north-
ern European stock. The fact that the Spanish had colonized the Southwest
considerably before northern Europeans began populating the eastern sea-
board seems not to have been considered.
P. R. Lannert
Further Reading
Abbott, Edith. Immigration: Select Documents and Case Records. New York: Arno
Press, 1969. Contains extracts of immigration acts and relevant court deci-
sions as well as social case histories from the files of Illinois immigration of-
ficials. Indexed.
with an emphasis on cultural and social trends, and with attention to eth-
nic conflicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
law.
342
See also Cable Act; Chinese Exclusion Act; Immigration Act of 1921; Im-
migration Act of 1924; Immigration Act of 1943; Immigration Act of 1990; Im-
migration and Nationality Act of 1952; Immigration and Nationality Act of
1965; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Immigra-
tion Reform and Control Act of 1986; Naturalization Act of 1790; Page law;
War Brides Act.

The Law: Federal legislation on immigration that imposed a quota system
Date: May 19, 1921

tion; Laws and treaties; Nativism and racism
Significance: This restrictive legislation created a quota system that favored

the nations of northern and western Europe and put an end to the ideal of
the United States as a melting pot.
Throughout most of the nineteenth century, immigration to the United

States was open to anyone who wanted to enter. By the 1880’s, however, this
unlimited freedom was beginning to disappear. The first law restricting immi-
gration came in 1882, when Chinese were excluded from entering American
territory. Hostility to Chinese workers in California sparked Congress to pass
a bill amid warnings that Chinese worked for lower wages than whites and
came from such a culturally inferior civilization that they would never make
good Americans. The law became permanent in 1902. Five years later, under
a gentlemen’s agreement with the Japanese government, citizens of that
country were added to the excluded list. The only other people barred from
entering the United States were prostitutes, insane persons, paupers, polyga-
mists, and anyone suffering from a “loathsome or contagious disease.” Under
these categories, compared to more than a million immigrants per year from
1890 to 1914, less than thirteen thousand were kept out annually.
343
The small number of those excluded troubled anti-immigrant groups,

such as the American Protective Association, founded in 1887, and the Immi-
gration Restriction League, created in Boston in 1894. Both organizations
warned of the “immigrant invasion” which threatened the American way of
life. These opponents of open immigration argued that since 1880, most new
arrivals had come from different areas of Europe from that of the pre-1880
immigrants, who came largely from Germany, England, Ireland, and Scandi-
navia. The “new” immigrants—mainly Slavs, Poles, Italians, and Jews—came
from poorer and more culturally “backward” areas of Europe.
Many of these immigrants advocated radicalism, anarchism, socialism, or
communism, and were unfamiliar with ideas of democracy and progress. Fur-
thermore, they preferred to live in ghettos in cities, where they strengthened
the power of political machines and corrupt bosses. Those who considered
themselves guardians of traditional American values found support for their
position among trade unionists in the American Federation of Labor (AFL),
whose president, Samuel Gompers, argued that the new immigrants provided
employers with an endless supply of cheap labor, leading to lower wages for
everyone.
Advocates of restriction found their chief congressional spokesperson in
Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, a member of the Immigration Restriction League,
who sponsored a bill calling for a literacy test. Such a law, which called upon
immigrants to be able to read and write in their native language, was seen as
an effective barrier to most “new” immigrants. Congress passed the bill in
1897, but President Grover Cleveland vetoed it, arguing that it was unneces-
sary and discriminatory. Cleveland believed that American borders should re-
main open to anyone who wanted to enter and that there were enough jobs
and opportunities to allow anyone to fulfill a dream of economic success. Ad-
vocates of this vision of the American Dream, however, were lessening in
number over time.
The assassination of President William McKinley in 1901 led to the exclu-
sion of anarchists and those who advocated the violent overthrow of the
government of the United States. A more important step to a quota system,
however, came in 1907, when the House and Senate established the U.S. Im-
migration Commission, under the leadership of Senator William P. Dilling-
ham. The commission issued a forty-two-volume report in 1910, advocating a
reduction in immigration because of the “racial inferiority” of new immigrant
groups. Studies of immigrant populations, the commission concluded, showed
that people from southern and eastern Europe had a higher potential for
criminal activity, were more likely to end up poor and sick, and were less intel-
ligent than other Americans. It called for passage of a literacy test to preserve
American values. Congress passed legislation in 1912 calling for such a test,
but President William Howard Taft vetoed it, saying that illiteracy resulted
from lack of educational opportunity and had little to do with native intelli-
gence. Open entrance to the United States was part of American history, and
many of America’s wealthiest and hardest working citizens had come without
344
knowing how to read and write. If

the United States barred such peo-
ple, Taft argued, America would
become weaker and less wealthy.
In 1915, Woodrow Wilson be-
came the third president to veto a
literacy bill, denouncing its viola-
tion of the American ideal of an
open door. Two years later, in the
wake of American entrance into
World War I and growing hostility
against foreigners, Congress over-
rode Wilson’s second veto and the
literacy test became law. Along with
establishing a reading test for any-
one over age sixteen, the law also
created a “barred zone” which ex-
cluded immigrants from most of
Asia, including China, India, and
Japan, regardless of whether they
could read. As it turned out, the President William Howard Taft around 1908. Taft
test that asked adults to read a few was chief justice of the United States when the Immi-
words in any recognized language gration Act of 1921 was enacted, but he vetoed leg-
did little to reduce immigration. islation making literacy a requirement for immigra-
Between 1918 and 1920, less than tion while he was president. (Library of Congress)
1 percent of those who took it
failed. Representative Albert Johnson, chair of the House Committee on Im-
migration, had been a longtime advocate of closing the borders of the United
States. In 1919, he called for the suspension of all immigration. Johnson’s
proposal was defeated in the House of Representatives.
In 1920, however, immigration increased dramatically, as did fears that mil-
lions of refugees from war-torn Europe were waiting to flood into the United
States. Much of the argument for restriction was based on ideas associated
with scientific racism. The Republican candidate for the presidency, War-
ren G. Harding, advocated restriction in several speeches, warning of the
dangers inherent in allowing open admission. He called for legislation that
would permit entrance to the United States only to people whose back-
ground and racial characteristics showed that they could adopt American val-
ues and principles. The next year, Vice President Calvin Coolidge authored a
magazine article claiming that laws of biology proved that “Nordics,” the pre-
ferred type, deteriorated intellectually and physically when allowed to inter-
marry with other races. These views reflected the growing influence of eugen-
ics, the science of improving the human race by discouraging the birth of the
“unfit.” Madison Grant, a lawyer and secretary of the New York Zoological So-
ciety, and later an adviser to Albert Johnson’s Immigration Committee, wrote
345
the most influential book advocating this racist way of thinking, The Passing of
the Great Race in America (1916). In it, he described human society as a huge
snake. Nordic races made up the head, while the inferior races formed the
tail. It would be this type of scientific argument, more than any other, that
would provide the major rationale for creation of the 1921 quota system. The
tail could not be allowed to rule the head.
Early in 1921, the House debated and passed Johnson’s bill calling for a
two-year suspension of all immigration. The Senate Committee on Immigra-
tion, chaired by Senator LeBaron Colt, held hearings on a similar proposal
but refused to support a total ban after hearing arguments from business
groups fearful that complete exclusion would stop all access to European la-
borers. Representatives from the National Association of Manufacturers testi-
fied on the need to have access to inexpensive labor, even though some busi-
ness leaders were beginning to fear that too many in the immigration pool
were influenced by communism and socialism, especially after the commu-
nist victory in Russia in 1918. The possibility of thousands of radical workers
with a greater tendency to strike coming into the country seemed too high a
price to pay in return for lower wages. Unions, especially the AFL, continued
to lobby for strict regulation of immigration. To keep wages high, Samuel
Gompers told Congress, foreign workers had to be kept out. By 1921, the only
widespread support for free and open immigration came from immigrant
groups themselves. Although a few members of Congress supported their po-
sition, it was a distinctly minority view.
Senator William Dillingham, whose report in 1910 had renewed efforts to
restrict immigration, offered a quota plan which he hoped would satisfy busi-
ness and labor. He called for a policy in which each nation would receive a
quota of immigrants equal to 5 percent of that country’s total population in
the United States according to the 1910 census. Dillingham’s suggestion
passed the Senate with little opposition and gained favor in the House. Be-
fore its final approval, however, Johnson and his supporters of total suspen-
sion reduced the quota to 3 percent and set 350,000 as the maximum number
of legal immigrants in any one year. Woodrow Wilson vetoed the bill shortly
before leaving office, but it was passed with only one dissenting vote in the
Senate during a special session called by President Harding on May 19, 1921.
The House approved the Emergency Quota Act the same day without a re-
corded vote. The only opposition came from representatives with large num-
bers of immigrants in their districts. Adolph Sabath, a Democratic congress-
person from Chicago, led the dissenters, arguing that the act was based on a
“pseudoscientific proposition” that falsely glorified the Nordic nations. His
comments had little effect on the result. One of the most important changes
in American immigration history went into effect in June of 1921.
Impact of Event The Emergency Quota Act of 1921 severely reduced im-
migration into the United States. In 1922, its first full year of operation, only
309,556 people legally entered the country, compared with 805,228 the previ-
346
ous year. Quotas for Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Australia, and New Zea-
land were generally filled quickly, although economic depressions in En-
gland, Ireland, and Germany kept many potential immigrants at home. Less
than half the legal number of immigrants came to America the first year; the
southern and eastern Europeans filled almost 99 percent of their limit. No
limits existed for Canada, Mexico, and other nations of the Western Hemi-
sphere. To keep an adequate supply of cheap agricultural labor available to
farmers in Texas and California, Congress refused to place a quota on immi-
gration from these areas of the world. Japan and China were the only coun-
tries with a quota of zero, as Congress continued its policy of exclusion for
most areas of Asia.
The 1921 act provided for “special preferences” for relatives of U.S. citi-
zens, including wives, children under eighteen, parents, brothers, and sis-
ters. The commissioner of immigration was to make it a priority to maintain
family unity; however, this was to be the only exception to the strict quota
policy.
Congress extended the “emergency” law in May, 1922, for two more years.
This move, however, did not satisfy Representative Johnson and others sup-
porting complete restriction. Johnson’s Immigration Committee continued
to hold hearings and gather evidence supporting an end to all immigration.
Johnson became increasingly interested in eugenics and remained in close
contact with Madison Grant. In 1923, Johnson was elected president of the
Eugenics Research Association of America, a group devoted to gathering sta-
tistics on the hereditary traits of Americans. He seemed especially interested
in studies showing a large concentration of “new” immigrants in mental hos-
pitals, prisons, and poorhouses. Such information led him to call for a change
in the law. A reduction in the quota for “new” immigrants was necessary, he
claimed, to save the United States from even larger numbers of paupers, men-
tal patients, and criminals. The Immigration Committee voted to change the
census base from 1910 to 1890, when there were far fewer southern and east-
ern Europeans in the country, and to reduce the quota from 3 percent to
2 percent. Congress would adopt those ideas in 1924.
Under the 1921 law, boats filled with prospective immigrants were re-
turned to their homelands. These actions, however, were only the beginning,
and the guardians of racial purity in Congress were already moving toward
even tighter controls. Restrictionists had gotten most of what they wanted.
Further Reading
Bennett, Marion T. American Immigration Policies. Washington, D.C.: Public Af-
fairs Press, 1963. Although written from a prorestriction point of view, this
book contains useful information on all immigration laws up to 1962 and
their effects on the numbers of people entering the United States. Con-
tains a brief but useful summary of arguments for and against the 1921 act.
347
Divine, Robert. American Immigration Policy, 1924-1952. New Haven, Conn.:

Yale University Press, 1957. Interesting and detailed account of the con-
gressional movement toward restriction. Although mainly concerned with
the 1924 law and its aftermath, there is a summary of attitudes in Congress
and the rest of the United States that led to the 1921 act. Written from an
antirestriction point of view.
New York: Atheneum, 1975. Classic account of anti-immigrant hostility in
the United States from the Civil War to the final victory for restriction dur-
ing the 1920’s. Presents a full account of the arguments for and against
quotas, and contains an extensive discussion of the 1921 bill and the con-
gressional debate on the subject.
1960’s.
law.
Solomon, Barbara. Ancestors and Immigrants. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1956. A study of the Immigration Restriction League of Bos-
ton. Asserts that restrictionists perceived their world as crumbling under
the influx of vast numbers of immigrants who knew nothing of democracy
and liberty and were inferior intellectually and physically. Most of the
study looks at attitudes before 1921.
tion Reform and Control Act of 1986; Naturalization Act of 1790; Page law.
348

The Law: Federal legislation on immigration that made the quota system
more restrictive
Date: May 26, 1924

tion; Laws and treaties; Nativism and racism
Significance: Also known as the National Origins Act, the Immigration Act
of 1924 restricted immigration by means of a quota system that severely re-
stricted immigration from central and eastern Europe.
There was no clearly defined official U.S. policy toward immigration until the
late nineteenth century. The United States was still a relatively young country,
and there was a need for settlers in the West and for workers to build industry.
Chinese immigrants flowed into California in 1849 and the early 1850’s,
searching for fortune and staying as laborers who worked the mines and
helped to build the transcontinental railroad.
The earliest immigration restriction focused on Asians. In 1875, the fed-
eral government restricted the number of Chinese and Japanese coming into
the country. The push for restriction of Asian immigrants was led by U.S.
workers. After the depression of 1877, Denis Kearney, an Irish-born labor or-
ganizer, helped found the Workingman’s Trade and Labor Union of San
Francisco, an anti-Chinese and anticapitalist group. Kearney and others be-
lieved that lower-paid Chinese workers took jobs away from white workers,
and they agitated for expulsion of the Chinese and legal restrictions on fu-
ture immigrants. Their efforts were successful in 1882, when the Chinese Ex-
clusion Act was passed. The act exempted teachers, students, merchants, and
pleasure travelers, and remained in effect until 1943. With the act of 1882,
the federal government had, for the first time, placed restrictions on the im-
migration of persons from a specific country. More specific policy toward Eu-
ropean immigration began during the 1880’s. In 1882, the federal govern-
ment excluded convicts, paupers, and mentally impaired persons. Organized
labor’s efforts also were successful in 1882, with the prohibition of employers’
recruiting workers in Europe and paying their passage to the United States.
Restrictive Changes Federal law became more restrictive during the

early twentieth century, with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1903,
which excluded epileptics, beggars, and anarchists. In 1907, the U.S. Immi-
gration Commission was formed. This group, also known as the Dillingham
Commission, published a forty-two-volume survey of the impact of immigra-
tion on American life and called for a literacy test and further immigration
restriction. Although several presidential vetoes had prevented a literacy re-
349
quirement, in 1917, the U.S. Congress overrode President Woodrow Wilson’s

veto and passed a law requiring a literacy test for newcomers. The test was de-
signed to reduce the number of immigrants, particularly those from south-
eastern Europe, where the literacy rate was low.
The marked change in official policy and in the view of a majority of peo-
ple in the United States was caused by several factors. A strong nativist move-
ment had begun after World War I with such groups as the American Protec-
tive Association, an organization that began in the midwest during the 1880’s
and focused on prejudice against aliens and Roman Catholics. Senator Henry
Cabot Lodge organized the Immigration Restriction League in Boston, indi-
cating the addition of U.S. leaders and intellectuals to the restriction move-
ment. The war had brought the United States into position as a major world
power, with a resultant view that the United States should be a nation of con-
formity. Political and economic problems in Europe, including the war and a
postwar economic depression, had led to fear of too many immigrants fleeing
Europe. Changes in the U.S. economy reduced the need for manual labor,
thus creating a fear of lack of job security.
The push for restriction coincided with the most intensive era of immigra-
tion in United States history. From the late 1880’s until the 1920’s, the nation
experienced wave after wave of immigration, with millions of persons coming
into the country each decade. The growth of new physical and social sciences
that emphasized heredity as a factor in intelligence led many people to be-
U.S . Health Service officers inspecting Japanese immigrants arriving on the West Coast of the
United States several months before the U.S . Congress passed the restrictive Immigration Act of
1924. (National Archives)
350
Application for the readmission to the United States of a Brooklyn restaurateur who had returned
to China for a visit. The letter cites the terms of the Immigration Act of 1924. (NARA)
lieve that persons such as Slavs or Italians were less intelligent than western
Europeans such as the Norwegians or the English. The belief in genetic infe-
riority gave credence to the immigration restriction movement and helped
sway the government.
At the same time that millions of newcomers were entering the United
States, a spirit of reform, the Progressive Era, had grown throughout the
country. Americans who saw themselves as progressive and forward-looking
pushed for change in politics, society, and education, particularly in the
crowded urban areas of the Northeast. Europeans had emigrated in large
numbers to the cities, and newer groups, such as Italians and Poles, were seen
by many progressive-minded reformers as the root of urban problems. Thus it
351
was with the help of progressive leaders that a push was made at the federal
level to restrict the number of immigrants.
Quota System In 1921, Congress passed a temporary measure that was the
first U.S. law specifically restricting European immigration. The act estab-
lished a quota system that held the number of immigrants to 3 percent of
each admissible nationality living in the United States in 1910. Quotas were
established for persons from Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, and New Zea-
land. Although only a temporary measure, the Immigration Act of 1921
marked the beginning of a permanent policy of restricting European immi-
gration. It began a bitter three-year controversy that led to the Immigration
Act of 1924.
The U.S. Congress amended the 1921 act with a more restrictive perma-
nent measure in May of 1924, the Johnson-Reid Act. This act, which became
known as the National Origins Act, took effect on July 1, 1924. It limited the
annual immigration to the United States to 2 percent of a country’s popula-
tion in the United States as of the census of 1890. With the large numbers
of northern and western Europeans who had immigrated to the country
throughout the nation’s history, the act effectively restricted southern and
eastern European immigrants to approximately 12 percent of the total immi-
grant population. Asian immigration was completely prohibited, but there
was no restriction on immigration from independent nations of the Western
Hemisphere.
The new law also changed the processing system for aliens by moving the
immigration inspection process to U.S. consulates in foreign countries and
requiring immigrants to obtain visas in their home countries before emigrat-
ing to the United States. The number of visas was held to 10 percent in each
country per month and thus reduced the number of people arriving at Ellis
Island, leading to the eventual closing of the facility.
The Immigration Act of 1924 reflected a change in the controversy that oc-
curred in the three-year period after the act of 1921. By 1924, the major factor
in immigration restriction was racial prejudice. By using the U.S. Census of
1890 as the basis for quotas, the government in effect sharply reduced the
number of southern and eastern Europeans, who had not begun to arrive in
large numbers until after that census year. The passage of the act codified an
official policy of preventing further changes in the ethnic composition of
U.S. society, and it was to remain in effect until passage of the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1965.
Judith Boyce DeMark
Further Reading
Curran, Thomas J. Xenophobia and Immigration, 1820-1930. Boston: Twayne,
1975. Basic overview of the reasons for immigration restriction through-
out U.S. history, focusing on nativism and such groups as the Ku Klux Klan.
352
Divine, Robert A. American Immigration Policy, 1924-1952. New Haven, Conn.:

Yale University Press, 1957. Reprint. New York: Da Capo Press, 1972. One
of the most comprehensive treatments of the history of immigration re-
striction from the 1924 act through the mid-1950’s.
Hirobe, Izumi. Japanese Pride, American Prejudice: Modifying the Exclusion Clause
of the 1924 Immigration Act. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2001.
Scholarly study of the impact of the Immigration Act of 1924 on Japanese
immigrants.
1960’s.
Seller, Maxine S. “Historical Perspectives on American Immigration Policy:
Case Studies and Current Implications.” In U.S. Immigration Policy, edited
by Richard R. Hofstetter. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1984. Con-
tains a chronology of the series of events leading up to the Immigration
Act of 1924, with a discussion of how those events relate to recent immigra-
tion history.
War Brides Act.

The Law: Federal legislation on immigration that loosened restrictiions

and naturalization; Laws and treaties
353
Significance: The Immigration Act of 1943 repealed Asian exclusion laws,

opening the way for further immigration reforms.
The passage by Congress of the Immigration Act, also known as the Mag-
nuson Act, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s signing it into law ended
the era of legal exclusion of Chinese immigrants to the United States and be-
gan an era during which sizable numbers of Chinese and other Asian immi-
grants came to the country. It helped bring about significant changes in race
relations in the United States.
The first wave of Chinese immigrants came from the Pearl River delta re-
gion in southern China. They began coming to California in 1849 during the
gold rush and continued to come to the western states as miners, railroad
builders, farmers, fishermen, and factory workers. Most were men. Many
came as contract laborers and intended to return to China. Anti-Chinese feel-
ings, begun during the gold rush and expressed in mob actions and local dis-
criminatory laws, culminated in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, barring
the immigration of Chinese laborers for ten years. The act was renewed in
1892, applied to Hawaii when those islands were annexed by the United
States in 1898, and made permanent in 1904. Another bill, passed in 1924,
made Asians ineligible for U.S. citizenship and disallowed Chinese wives of
U.S. citizens to immigrate to the United States. As a result, the Chinese popu-
lation in the United States declined from a peak of 107,475 in 1880 to 77,504
in 1940.
The passage of the Magnuson Act of 1943, which repealed the Chinese Ex-
clusion Act of 1882, inaugurated profound changes in the status of ethnic
Chinese who were citizens or residents of the United States. It made Chinese
immigrants, many of whom had lived in the United States for years, eligible
for citizenship. It also allotted a minuscule quota of 105 Chinese persons per
year who could enter the United States as immigrants. The 1943 bill was a re-
sult of recognition of China’s growing international status after 1928 under
the Nationalist government and growing U.S. sympathy for China’s heroic re-
sistance to Japanese aggression after 1937. It also was intended to counter
Japanese wartime propaganda aimed at discrediting the United States among
Asians by portraying it as a racist nation.
Post-World War II Changes World War II was a turning point for Chinese-
U.S. relations. After Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in December, 1941, China
and the United States became allies against the Axis Powers. Madame Chiang
Kai-shek, wife of China’s wartime leader, won widespread respect and sympa-
thy for China during her visit to the United States; she was the second female
foreign leader to address a joint session of Congress. In 1943, the United
States and Great Britain also signed new treaties with China that ended a cen-
tury of international inequality for China. These events and the contribu-
tions of Chinese Americans in the war favorably affected the position and sta-
tus of Chinese Americans. The 1943 act also opened the door for other
354
legislation that allowed more Chinese to immigrate to the United States. In

the long run, these laws had a major impact on the formation of Chinese fam-
ilies in the United States.
The War Brides Act of 1945, for example, permitted foreign-born wives of
U.S. soldiers to enter the United States and become naturalized. Approxi-
mately six thousand Chinese women entered the United States during the
next several years as wives of U.S. servicemen. An amendment to this act,
passed in 1946, put the Chinese wives and children of U.S. citizens outside the
quota, resulting in the reunion of many separated families and allowing ten
thousand Chinese, mostly wives, and also children of U.S. citizens of Chinese
ethnicity, to enter the country during the next eight years. The Displaced Per-
sons Act of 1948 granted permanent resident status, and eventually the right
of citizenship, to 3,465 Chinese students, scholars, and others stranded in the
United States by the widespread civil war that erupted between the Chinese
Nationalists and communists after the end of World War II.
The Refugee Relief Act of 1953 allowed an additional 2,777 refugees to re-
main in the United States after the civil war ended in a communist victory
and the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. Some Chinese stu-
dents from the Republic of China on Taiwan, who came to study in the United
States after 1950 and found employment and sponsors after the end of their
studies, were also permitted to remain and were eligible for naturalization.
The four immigration acts passed between 1943 and 1953 can be viewed as
a result of the alliance between the United States and the Republic of China
in World War II and U.S. involvement in the Chinese civil war that followed.
In a wider context, they were also the result of changing views on race and
race relations that World War II and related events brought about. Finally,
they heralded the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which revolution-
ized U.S. immigration policy in ending racial quotas. Its most dramatic conse-
quence was the significant increase of Asian immigrants in general, and Chi-
nese immigrants in particular, into the United States.
The new immigrants changed the makeup of Chinese American society
and caused a change in the way the Chinese were perceived by the majority
groups in the United States. Whereas most of the earlier immigrants tended
to live in ghettoized Chinatowns, were poorly educated, and overwhelmingly
worked in low-status jobs as laundrymen, miners, or railroad workers, the new
immigrants were highly educated, cosmopolitan, and professional. They came
from the middle class, traced their roots to all parts of China, had little diffi-
culty acculturating and assimilating into the academic and professional mi-
lieu of peoples of European ethnicity in the United States, and tended not to
live in Chinatowns. The latter group was mainly responsible for revolutioniz-
ing the way Chinese Americans were perceived in the United States.
Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur
355
Further Reading
ica, 1882-1943. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991. Articles from
nine scholars on different facets of Chinese immigration to the United
States during the era of exclusion.
1960’s.
Min, Pyong Gap, ed. Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues. Thou-
sand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1995. Collection of essays that gives
an overall picture of Asian American issues. A new edition was scheduled
for 2006 publication.
Riggs, Fred W. Pressure on Congress: A Study of the Repeal of Chinese Exclusion.
1950. Reprint. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1972. Detailed account
of the reasons for the repeal of the exclusion law.
War Brides Act.

The Law: Federal legislation on immigration that imposed new restrictions
Immigration issues: Discrimination; Laws and treaties
Significance: Congress passed this legislation in response to a widespread

belief among legislators and the general public that many of the economic
356
and social ills of the United States were caused by large populations of
poor, non-English-speaking immigrants and in response to a growing need
for skilled workers in technical fields in an increasingly international mar-
ketplace.
One of many immigration laws passed during the twentieth century, the Immi-
gration Act of 1990 set numerical limits for immigrants to the United States
and established a system of preferences to determine which of the many ap-
plicants for admission should be accepted. Under the terms of the 1990 act,
only 675,000 immigrants, not including political refugees, were to be admitted
to the United States each year. These immigrants were eligible for preferen-
tial admission consideration if they fell into one of three groups: immigrants
who had family members already legally in the country; employment-based
immigrants who were able to prove that they had exceptional ability in cer-
tain professions with a high demand; and those from designated underrepre-
sented nations, who were labeled “diversity immigrants.”
Because the new law nearly tripled the annual allotment of employment-
based immigrants from 54,000 to 140,000, business and industry leaders her-
alded their increased opportunity to compete internationally for experi-
enced and talented engineers, technicians, and multinational executives.
Others believed that the preference for certain kinds of workers masked a
preference for whites over nonwhites, and wealthier immigrants over poorer.
Divisions over the law between racial and political groups intensified when
successful lobbying led to refinements in the law making it easier for fashion
models and musicians, especially from Europe, to gain visas, while efforts to
gain admittance for more women fleeing genital mutilation in African and
Arab nations failed.
The act made it easier for certain people—contract workers, musicians
and other artists, researchers and educators participating in exchange pro-
grams—to perform skilled work in the United States on a temporary basis,
with no intention of seeking citizenship. At the same time, the new law made
it more difficult for unskilled workers, such as domestic workers and laborers,
to obtain immigrant visas.
Finally, the Immigration Act of 1990 attempted to correct criticism of the
1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act by increasing that act’s antidis-
crimination provisions and increasing the penalties for discrimination. In a
significant change in U.S. immigration law, the act revised the reasons a per-
son might be refused immigrant status or be deported. After 1952, for exam-
ple, communists were denied permission to enter the country on nonimmi-
grant work visas and were subject to deportment if identified, and potential
political refugees from nations friendly to the United States were turned away
as a matter of foreign policy. Under the new law, a wider range of political and
ideological beliefs became acceptable.
Cynthia A. Bily
357
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952
Further Reading
law.
War Brides Act.
Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952
The Law: Federal law relaxing restrictions on immigration
Date: June 27, 1952
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization; Laws

and treaties; Refugees
Significance: Also known as the McCarran-Walter Act, the Immigration and

Nationality Act of 1952 eased restrictions on Asian immigration and con-
solidated federal immigration statutes.
During the early 1950’s, as it had periodically throughout the twentieth cen-
tury, immigration again became the subject of intense national debate, and a
movement arose to reform immigration law. At the time, there were more
than two hundred federal laws dealing with immigration, with little coordina-
tion among them.
Reform Efforts The movement toward immigration reform actually be-

gan in 1947, with a U.S. Senate committee investigation on immigration laws,
358
resulting in a voluminous report in 1950 and a proposed bill. The ensuing de-
bate was divided between a group who wanted to abandon the quota system
and increase the numbers of immigrants admitted, and those who hoped to
shape immigration law to enforce the status quo. Leaders of the latter camp
were the architects of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952: Patrick
McCarran, senator from Nevada, Francis Walter, congressman from Pennsyl-
vania, and Richard Arens, staff director of the Senate Subcommittee to Inves-
tigate Immigration and Naturalization. McCarran was the author of the In-
ternal Security Act of 1951, which provided for registration of communist
organizations and the internment of communists during national emergen-
cies; Walter was an immigration specialist who had backed legislation to ad-
mit Europeans from camps for displaced persons; Arens had been staff direc-
tor for the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Each looked upon
immigration control as an extension of his work to defend the United States
against foreign and domestic enemies.
McCarran was most outspoken in defending the concept of restrictions on
the basis of national origin, stating in the Senate:
There are hard-core indigestible blocs who have not become integrated into the
American way of life, but who, on the contrary, are its deadly enemy. . . . this Na-
tion is the last hope of Western civilization; and if this oasis of the world shall be
overrun, perverted, contaminated, or destroyed, then the last flickering light of
humanity will be extinguished.
Arens branded critics of the proposed act as either communists, misguided

liberals enraptured by communist propaganda, apologists for specific immi-
grant groups, or “professional vote solicitors who fawn on nationality groups,
appealing to them not as Americans but as hyphenated Americans.” Among
the bill’s critics, however, were Harry S. Truman, the U.S. president in 1952,
and Hubert H. Humphrey, senator from Minnesota and future Democratic
presidential nominee. One liberal senator, Herbert Lehman, attacked the na-
tional origins provisions of the existing immigration code as a racist measure
that smacked of the ethnic purity policies of the recently defeated German
Nazis. Truman vetoed the bill, but his veto was overridden, 278 to 113 in the
House, and 57 to 26 in the Senate.
In several areas, the 1952 law made no significant changes: Quotas for Eu-
ropean immigrants were little changed, no quotas were instituted for immi-
grants from North and South American countries, and the issue of illegal im-
migration was given scant attention. There were significant changes in some
areas, however: reversal of the ban on Asian immigration, extension of natu-
ralization to persons regardless of race or sex, and the first provision for refu-
gees as a special class of immigrants.
Provisions The Asiatic Barred Zone that had been established in 1917 was
eliminated by providing for twenty-five hundred entries from the area—a mi-
359
nuscule number for the region, but the first recognition of Asian immigra-
tion rights in decades. This small concession for Asians was offset partially by
the fact that anyone whose ancestry was at least half Asian would be counted
under the quota for the Asian country of ancestry, even if the person was a
resident of another country. This provision, which was unlike the system of
counting quotas for European countries, was specifically and openly de-
signed to prevent Asians living in North and South American countries,
which had no quota restrictions, from flooding into the United States.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 also ensured for the first
time that the “right of a person to become a naturalized citizen of the United
States shall not be denied or abridged because of race or sex.” The provision
of not denying citizenship based on sex addressed the issue of women who
had lost their U.S. citizenship by marrying foreign men of certain categories;
men who had married women from those categories had never lost their citi-
zenship.
The issue of refugees was a new concern resulting from World War II. More
than seven million persons had lost their homelands in the aftermath of the
war, as a result of the conquering and reorganization of countries primarily in
Eastern Europe. The 1952 act did not present a comprehensive solution to
the problem of refugees but did give the attorney general special power, sub-
ject to congressional overview, to admit refugees into the United States under
President Harry S . Truman objected to some parts of the Immigration and Nationality Act but nev-
ertheless signed it into law. (Library of Congress)
360
a special status. Although this was expected to be a seldom-used provision of

the law, regular upheavals throughout the world later made it an important
avenue of immigration into the United States.
Finally, the Immigration and Nationality Act also included stringent secu-
rity procedures designed to prevent communist subversives from infiltrating
the United States through immigration. Some of these harsh measures were
specifically mentioned by Truman in his veto message, but the anticommu-
nist Cold War climate made such measures hard to defeat.
Over the objections of Congress, President Truman appointed a special
commission to examine immigration in September, 1952. After hearings in
several cities, it issued the report Whom Shall We Welcome?, which was critical of
the McCarran-Walter Act. Some liberal Democrats attempted to make the
1952 presidential election a forum on immigration policy, but without suc-
cess. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the victorious Republican nominee for presi-
dent, made few specific statements on immigration policy during the cam-
paign. After his election, however, he proposed a special provision for allowing
almost a quarter of a million refugees from communism to immigrate to the
United States over a two-year period, couching his proposal in terms of hu-
manitarianism and foreign policy. The resulting Refugee Relief Act of 1953
allowed the admission of 214,000 refugees, but only if they had assurance of
jobs and housing or were close relatives of U.S. citizens and could pass exten-
sive screening procedures designed to deter subversives. Several similar ex-
ceptions in the following years managed to undercut the McCarran-Walter
Act, which its many critics had been unable to overturn outright.
Irene Struthers Rush
Further Reading
Dimmitt, Marius A. The Enactment of the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952. Law-
rence: University Press of Kansas, 1971. Written as a doctoral dissertation,
this study provides one of the most thorough analyses of the 1952 immigra-
tion bill.
law.
LeMay, Michael C. From Open Door to Dutch Door: An Analysis of U.S. Immigration
Policy Since 1820. New York: Praeger, 1987. A comprehensive overview of
the forces behind and results of changing U.S. immigration policy. Chap-
ter 5 opens with a discussion of the Immigration Act of 1952.
____________, ed. The Gatekeepers: Comparative Immigration Policy. New York:
Praeger, 1989. Compares immigration policy and politics in the United
States, Australia, Great Britain, Germany, Israel, and Venezuela. Helpful in
understanding overall immigration issues.
361

Reimers, David M. “Recent Immigration Policy: An Analysis.” In The Gateway:
U.S. Immigration Issues and Policies, edited by Barry R. Chiswick. Washing-
ton, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1982.
Discusses immigration policies and laws from the 1920’s through the
1970’s. Includes information on Senator Patrick McCarran’s role in immi-
gration law.
migration Act of 1990; Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965; Immigration
and Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Immigration Reform and Con-
trol Act of 1986; Naturalization Act of 1790; Page law; War Brides Act.
Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1965
The Law: Federal legislation that eased restrictions on Asian immigration
Date: October 3, 1965
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization; Laws

and treaties; Refugees
Significance: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 removed re-

strictions on non-European immigration, significantly altering the ethnic
makeup of U.S. immigrants.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 codified legislation that had de-
veloped haphazardly over the past century. Although it liberalized some ar-
eas, it was discriminatory in that quotas were allotted according to national
origins. This resulted in western and northern European nations receiving
no less than 85 percent of the total allotment. The Immigration and National-
ity Act of 1965 allowed non-Europeans to enter the United States on an equal
basis with Europeans. Before the 1965 legislation, U.S. immigration policies
favored northern and western Europeans.
362
Ceremony under the Statue of Liberty at which President Lyndon B . Johnson (standing to the left of
the chair) signed the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Ellis Island reception center is visible at
the upper left corner of the picture, to the west of Manhattan Island. (Lyndon B . Johnson Library/
Yoichi R. Okamoto)
Reform Begins With the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960, circum-

stances for meaningful immigration reform came into being: Kennedy be-
lieved that immigration was a source of national strength, the Civil Rights
movement had promoted an ideology to eliminate racist policies, and the
U.S. position during the Cold War necessitated that immigration policies be
just. Thus, Kennedy had Abba Schwartz, an expert on refugee and immigra-
tion matters, develop a plan to revise immigration policy.
In July of 1963, Kennedy sent his proposal for immigration reform to Con-
gress. His recommendations had three major provisions: the quota system
should be phased out over a five-year period; no natives of any one country
should receive more than 10 percent of the newly authorized quota numbers;
and a seven-person immigration board should be set up to advise the presi-
dent. Kennedy also advocated that family reunification remain a priority; the
Asiatic Barred Zone be eliminated; and nonquota status be granted to resi-
dents of Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago, as it was to other Western Hemi-
sphere residents. Last, the preference structure was to be altered to liberalize
requirements for skilled people.
After the assassination of President Kennedy, President Lyndon B. John-
son took up the cause of immigration. Although immigration was not a major
issue during the 1964 campaign, both sides had courted diverse ethnic com-
munities, whose will now had to be considered. The Democratic Party’s land-
363
slide victory gave Johnson a strong mandate for his Great Society programs,
of which immigration reform was a component. Secretary of State Dean Rusk
argued the need for immigration reform to bolster U.S. foreign policy. Rusk,
Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, and others criticized the current system
for being discriminatory and argued that the proposed changes would be
economically advantageous to the United States. Senator Edward Kennedy
held hearings and concluded that “all recognized the unworkability of the na-
tional origins quota system.”
Outside Congress, ethnic, voluntary, and religious organizations lobbied
and provided testimony before Congress. They echoed the administration’s
arguments about discrimination. A few southerners in Congress argued that
the national origins concept was not discriminatory—it was a mirror reflect-
ing the U.S. population, so those who would best assimilate into U.S. society
would enter. However, the focus of the congressional debate was on how to al-
ter the national origins system, not on whether it should be changed. The
most disputed provisions concerned whether emphasis should be on needed
skills, family reunification, or limits set on Western Hemisphere immigration.
Family unification prevailed.
Provisions The new law replaced the national origins system with hemi-
spheric caps, 170,000 from the Old World and 120,000 from the New. Spouses,
unmarried minor children, and parents of U.S. citizens were exempt from
numerical quotas. Preferences were granted first to unmarried adult chil-
dren of U.S. citizens (20 percent); next, to spouses and unmarried adult chil-
dren of permanent resident aliens (20 percent). Professionals, scientists, and
artists of exceptional ability were awarded third preference (10 percent) but
required certification from the U.S. Department of Labor. Married children
of U.S. citizens had fourth preference (10 percent). Next were those broth-
ers and sisters of U.S. citizens who were older than twenty-one years of age
(24 percent), followed by skilled and unskilled workers in occupations for
which labor was in short supply (10 percent). Refugees from communist or
communist-dominated countries or the Middle East were seventh (6 per-
cent). Nonpreference status was assigned to anyone not eligible under any of
the above categories; there have been more preference applicants than can
be accommodated, so nonpreference status has not been used.
The law had unexpected consequences. The framers of the legislation ex-
pected that the Old World slots would be filled by Europeans. They assumed
that family reunification would favor Europeans, because they dominated the
U.S. population. However, those from Europe who wanted to come were in
the lower preference categories, while well-trained Asians had been coming
to the United States since 1943 and were well qualified for preference posi-
tions. Once they, or anyone else, became a permanent resident, a whole
group of people became eligible to enter the country under the third prefer-
ence category. After a five-year wait—the residential requirement for citizen-
ship—more persons became eligible under the second preference category.
364
As a result, many immigrants were directly or indirectly responsible for

twenty-five to fifty new immigrants.
The law set forth a global ceiling of 290,000, but actual totals ranged from
398,089 in 1977 to 904,292 in 1993. Refugees and those exempt from numeri-
cal limitations were the two major categories that caused these variations. The
refugee count had varied according to situations such as that of the “boat peo-
ple” from Cuba in 1981. In 1991, refugees and those seeking asylum totaled
139,079; in 1993, they totaled 127,343. Persons in nonpreference categories
increased from 113,083 in 1976 to 255,059 in 1993. Total immigration for
1991 was 827,167 and for 1993 was 904,292—well above the global ceiling.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 enabled some of the most
able medical, scientific, engineering, skilled, and other professional talent to
enter the United States. The medical profession illustrates this trend. In the
ten years after the enactment of the 1965 act, seventy-five thousand foreign
physicians entered the United States. By 1974, immigrant physicians made up
one-fifth of the total number of physicians and one-third of the interns and
residents in the United States. Each immigrant doctor represented more
than a million dollars in education costs. In addition, they often took posi-
tions in the inner-city and rural areas, which prevented the collapse of the de-
livery of medical services to those locations.
Arthur W. Helweg
Further Reading
American Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Good general history of U.S.
immigration. Analyzes the causes and consequences of the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1965.
Glazer, Nathan, ed. Clamor at the Gates: The New American Immigration. San Fran-
cisco: ICS Press, 1985. Superb evaluation of the “new immigration” that re-
sulted from the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
York: Foundation Press, 2002. Legal textbook on American immigration
and refugee law.
Reimers, David M. Still the Golden Door: The Third World Comes to America. 2d ed.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1992. Detailed historical study of the
significant political and social events and personages leading to and imple-
menting the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
365
Immigration and Naturalization Service

and Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Immigration Reform and Con-
Immigration and
Naturalization Service
Identification: Former federal government agency that until 2003 adminis-
tered laws relating to the admission, exclusion, and deportation of aliens
and the naturalization of aliens lawfully residing in the United States
Date: Established in 1891; functions transferred to Department of Home-
land Security in 2003
Immigration issues: Border control; Citizenship and naturalization; Illegal

immigration; Law enforcement
Significance: The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is the most

important agency in the enforcement of U.S. immigration law.
On March 3, 1891, the U.S. Congress passed an immigration law that gave the
federal government the sole responsibility for the enforcement of immigra-
tion policy and created a Bureau of Immigration as part of the Treasury De-
partment. Soon afterward, the Bureau was transferred to the newly created
Commerce Department and then, in 1913, to the Department of Labor. The
Bureau expanded greatly during and after World War I, when the passport
system was instituted and the Bureau placed agents at all major points of en-
try. In 1933 an executive order changed the name of the Bureau to the Immi-
gration and Naturalization Service. Seven years later, the INS was transferred
from the Department of Labor to the Department of Justice. On March 1,
2003, the functions of the INS were transferred to U.S. Citizenship and Immi-
gration Services within the newly created Department of Homeland Security.
The INS had five primary duties. First, it inspected people who were not
citizens of the United States, or aliens, to determine if they could be legally
admitted into the country, either as residents or visitors. Second, it made
366
judgments regarding requests of aliens for benefits under American immi-

gration law. Third, it guarded against illegal entry into the United States.
Fourth, it investigated, apprehended, and deported aliens who were in the
country illegally. Fifth, it examined noncitizens who wished to become citi-
zens.
Law Enforcement Since the Immigration and Naturalization Service was

responsible for admitting those who were permitted legally to enter the
United States and for excluding or deporting those who were not, it was the
chief agency for enforcing the nation’s immigration laws. The enforcement
missions of the INS were carried out by four divisions: the Border Patrol, In-
vestigations, Intelligence, and Detention and Deportation.
The Border Patrol was made up of uniformed officers who guarded the
country’s borders in order to prevent illegal entry. Most of these officers pa-
trolled the border between the United States and Mexico, where the greatest
number of illegal entries occured. As popular concern over illegal immigra-
tion from Mexico grew during the 1980’s and 1990’s, Border Patrol officers
found themselves under pressure to stem the flow. During the early 1990’s the
entire Border Patrol consisted of only 3,700 agents. Although these agents
caught over one million illegal immigrants per year, an estimated 300,000 to
400,000 immigrants succeeded in crossing into the country annually. In addi-
tion, the Border Patrol faced the problem of distinguishing among nonciti-
zens from Mexico and Central America and U.S. citizens of Hispanic ancestry.
As a result of the pressures and unique challenges of its law-enforcement
mission, the Border Patrol was in a position to receive a great deal of criticism.
A study by the American Friends Service Committee, conducted during the
early 1990’s, found nearly four hundred victims of abuse by the Border Pa-
trol. Half of these victims were U.S. citizens.
The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
attempted to enhance the Border Patrol’s enforcement power by authorizing
that additional border guards control the U.S.-Mexico border. It also pro-
vided funds for a fence along the border between California and Mexico.
Nevertheless, controlling the border continued to be an overwhelming chal-
lenge.
The Investigations Division of the INS was in charge of enforcing immigra-
tion laws in the interior of the United States. Investigation agents investigated
places of employment where they suspected that illegal aliens were working.
They attempted to apprehend aliens for deportation and prosecute employ-
ers who knowingly hired individuals who were in the country illegally. Investi-
gations agents also worked with other law-enforcement agencies to arrest
noncitizens who were involved in criminal activities such as drug trafficking
and organized crime. A special Anti-Smuggling Branch of the Investigations
Division concentrated on breaking up smuggling rings run by noncitizens.
During the early 1990’s the INS employed about 1,600 investigations agents,
and the 1996 law authorized the hiring of an additional 1,200 agents.
367
The Intelligence Division was in charge of gathering, analyzing, and com-

municating information relevant to all INS operations, and it directed the
headquarters command center. The Detention and Deportation Division
took custody of illegal aliens and aliens arrested for criminal activities in the
United States. This division was in charge of setting deportation procedures
in motion. When aliens could not be immediately deported, they could be
placed in detention facilities run by this division of the INS in nine Service
Processing Centers around the United States. The Detention and Deporta-
tion Division could also place its detainees in institutions run by the Federal
Bureau of Prisons.
In addition to enforcing immigration law, the INS also cooperated with
other enforcement agencies in attempting to stop the flow of drugs into the
United States. From 1988 until early 2003, the Border Patrol was the chief
agency for intercepting illegal drugs coming from foreign countries. INS
agents in the interior worked with other agencies attempting to stop drug-
trafficking organizations.
Inspections and Citizenship In addition to immigration law enforce-

ment, the INS was responsible for examining people from other countries
Image Not Available
368
who want to come to the United States temporarily or permanently and for
enabling qualified resident aliens to become U.S. citizens. These tasks were
handled by three sections: Adjudication and Nationality, Inspections, and Le-
galization and Administrative Appeals. Adjudication and Nationality received
applications for immigration benefits and petitions for citizenship. In 1995
the INS naturalized 500,000 new citizens, a staggering number considering
that only 2,800 INS officers worked with both citizenship and immigration
benefits cases that year.
The Inspections office had the task of interviewing all travelers entering
the United States by air, land, or sea. In 1996 the two thousand inspections
agents processed about 484 million travelers. Legalization and Administra-
tive Appeals is in charge of the petitions of immigrants whose applications for
immigration have been refused.
Other INS Activities The Immigration and Naturalization Service was

the primary source of federal government information on migration and on
procedures for acquiring citizenship. The service’s Information Resources
Management prepares records and databases. The INS issued a wide variety
of publications, including an annual Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service and an INS Fact Book. As a part of its naturalization ser-
vices, the service provided advice, information, and textbooks to those who
wanted to prepare for citizenship examinations.
Twenty-first Century Changes During the late twentieth century,

changes in world migration patterns, the ease of international travel, and a
growing emphasis on controlling illegal immigration fostered the growth of
the INS. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the INS was
one of several existing federal agencies that were incorporated into the new
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, a cabinet department of the federal
government that is concerned with protecting the American homeland and
the safety of American citizens.
Since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, most INS
functions have been divided into two bureaus: the U.S. Citizenship and Immi-
gration Services (USCIS) and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs En-
forcement. The Executive Office for Immigration Review and the Board of
Immigration Appeals, which review decisions made by the USCIS, remain un-
der the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice.
Immigration officers now specialize in inspection, examination, adjudica-
tion, legalization, investigation, patrol, and refugee and asylum issues. The
USCIS continues to enforce laws providing for selective immigration and
controlled entry of temporary visitors such as tourists and business travelers.
It does so by inspecting and admitting arrivals at land, sea, and airports of en-
try, administering benefits such as naturalization and permanent resident sta-
tus, and apprehending and removing aliens who enter illegally or violate the
requirements of their stay. Like its predecessor, the INS, the USCIS has been
369
criticized for downplaying its mission of social service and cultural assimila-
tion while overemphasizing its law-enforcement role in ways that may pro-
duce human rights abuses.
Updated by Theodore M. Vestal
Further Reading
trols. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley, 2005. Critical analysis of the implemen-
tation of U.S. immigration laws, with particular attention to the work of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service.
visiting aliens.
grants Since 1882. New York: Hill & Wang, 2004. Study of the impact of igno-
rance, partisan politics, and unintended consequences in immigration
policy, including during the post-September 11, 2001, war on terror.
Gomez, Iris D. Representing Non-citizens and INS Detainees: Resolving Problems in
the Current Climate of Uncertainty. Boston: MCLE, 2003. Legal guide for at-
torneys who represent aliens facing legal problems with the Immigration
and Naturalization Service.
York: Foundation Press, 2002. Legal textbook on American immigration
and refugee law.
tation.
Weissinger, George. Law Enforcement and the INS: A Participant Observation
Study of Control Agents. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1996. A
look inside the daily lives of INS officers.
Welch, Michael. “The Role of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in
the Prison-Industrial Complex.” Social Justice 27 (Fall, 2000): 73-89. Critical
analysis of the INS in administering policies that produce human rights
abuses rather than cultural assimilation.
370
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE V. CHADHA

and Nationality Act of 1965; Immigration law; Immigration Reform and Con-
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

SERVICE V. CHADHA
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on a deportation case that had impor-
tant political ramifications
Date: June 23, 1983
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Court cases; Government and poli-

tics
Significance: By overturning congressional use of the legislative veto, the

Supreme Court, in this single decision, overturned more combined laws
than it had in its entire history.
During the 1960’s, Jagdish Chadha, a Kenyan of Asian Indian descent carry-
ing a British passport, entered the United States on a student visa. When his
student visa expired, he was denied reentry into either Great Britain or Kenya
and applied for permanent residence in the United States. After lengthy de-
liberations, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) granted his
application to stay, only to have the House of Representatives veto the INS de-
cision, leaving Chadha to face deportation.
Both liberals and conservatives saw the case as a chance to overcome the
burgeoning practice of Congress passing laws containing legislative veto pro-
visions. These enactments allowed one or both houses of Congress to act
jointly or independently to cancel executive branch regulations made pursu-
ant to some vague delegation of power.
Liberal public interest groups played the more public role as Ralph Na-
der’s consumer advocate litigation group took over Chadha’s case in the Su-
preme Court. The liberal public interest group’s interest in the case stemmed
from the explosion of congressional enactments of legislative vetoes. After
having fought for the passage of regulatory legislation on the environment,
consumer protection, worker safety, or similar causes, these liberal groups of-
ten were frustrated by the bureaucratic regulatory process. If they succeeded
in the bureaucracy, they then were frustrated by the actions of their more
wealthy opponents, who would persuade one or both houses of Congress to
kill offending regulations with a legislative veto. Those conservatives who op-
371
Immigration “crisis”
posed both excessive delegations of power and legislative vetoes had no ap-
parent vehicle for participation.
Conservative chief justice Warren E. Burger wrote the Court’s 7-2 majority
opinion, which cut across liberal and conservative opinion and ended the use
of the congressional veto. A moderate Lewis F. Powell, Jr., concurred. Moder-
ately conservative justice Byron R. White dissented, upholding the use of leg-
islative vetoes, and conservative justice William H. Rehnquist also dissented.
The diversity of opinion continues. The Court seemed willing to push further
in the direction of Chadha in Bowsher v. Synar (1986), but seemed to withdraw
from Chadha’s advanced stand in Morrison v. Olson (1988) and Mistretta v.
United States (1989).
Richard L. Wilson
Further Reading
law.
See also Deportation; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Immigration and

Naturalization Service; Immigration law; Mexican deportations during the
Depression; Twice migrants; Zadvydas v. Davis.
Definition: Popular fear that began developing in the late twentieth century
that the United States was in peril of being overrun by immigrants
Immigration issues: Demographics; Illegal immigration; Nativism and

racism
Significance: Immigration to the United States increased steadily after

1965, reaching record levels during the 1990’s and early twenty-first cen-
tury. Between 1990 and 2000 alone, the U.S. Census reported a 57 percent
increase in the number of foreign-born residents of the United States. Al-
though earlier immigrants came chiefly from Europe, many of these more
recent immigrants arrived from Latin America and Asia. This new trend in
372
immigration increased ethnic diversity in the United States, and both the
large numbers and the non-European origins of the immigrants created
perceptions of an immigration crisis.
In 1965, the U.S. Congress passed an immigration act that did away with the
European bias of the nation’s immigration policy and made family reunifica-
tion, rather than national origin, the primary qualification for admission. At
first, it was thought that the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 would
not greatly expand immigration. However, legal immigration increased from
about 250,000 per year during the early 1960’s to 1,827,167 in 1991. Illegal
immigration, particularly from Mexico, also appears to have increased from
the 1960’s to the 1990’s. A backlash against immigration began to develop
among many segments of the American population.
A New Immigrant Population According to estimates of the U.S. Bureau

of the Census, the legal immigrant population in the spring of 1997 was 25.8
million people. Immigrants, then, made up nearly one out of every ten peo-
ple in the United States by the end of the 1990’s. These were mostly relatively
new immigrants: More than 80 percent had arrived since 1970, and more than
60 percent had arrived since 1980. In addition to these legal immigrants, ap-
proximately 300,000 to 400,000 illegal immigrants entered the United States
each year. Although many of these illegal immigrants were in the United
States only for seasonal or other temporary employment, the Immigration
and Naturalization Service has estimated that the illegal immigrant popula-
tion of the United States was about 4 million people during the 1990’s.
Not only were immigrants entering the United States in large numbers,
but they also were coming from places that had sent relatively few immigrants
to America in earlier years. Heavy immigration from Latin America and Asia,
combined with comparatively large family sizes among Latin Americans and
Asians, began to change the racial and ethnic makeup of the United States.
For most of U.S. history, the overwhelming majority of Americans were white
Europeans, with a large minority of African Americans. The new immigrants
and their children, however, brought a new cultural and racial diversity to the
United States.
According to projections of the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the white non-
Hispanic component of the population could be expected to decline from
about 72 percent to only 53 percent from the year 2000 to 2050. Black non-
Hispanic Americans were expected to increase only slightly during this pe-
riod, from 12.2 percent to 13.6 percent. Asians, who made up less than 1 per-
cent of the U.S. population in 1970 had increased to almost 3 percent by 1990
(“Asians and Others” constituted 3.8 percent). By 2050, it was predicted that
8.2 percent of all Americans would be of Asian heritage. Hispanics, who were
less than 5 percent of the U.S. population in 1970, had grown to 9 percent in
1990. By the year 2050, if ethnic trends in immigration and fertility continued
as expected, almost one out of every four Americans would be Hispanic.
373
Projected Changes in the Ethnic and Racial

Composition of the United States, 2000-2050
(Percentage of total U.S. population)
White, Black, Asian &

Year non-Hispanic non-Hispanic Pacific Islander Hispanic
2000 71.8 12.2 3.9 11.4
2005 69.9 12.4 4.4 12.6
2010 68.0 12.6 4.8 13.8
2015 66.1 12.7 5.3 15.1
2020 64.3 12.9 5.7 16.3
2025 62.4 13.0 6.2 17.6
2030 60.5 13.1 6.6 18.9
2035 58.6 13.2 7.1 20.3
2040 56.7 13.3 7.5 21.7
2045 54.7 13.5 7.9 23.1
2050 52.8 13.6 8.2 24.5
Source: U.S . Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P25-1130, “Population Projections of
the United States by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin, 1995 to 2050.” March, 1997. Washington,
D.C .: U.S . Government Printing Office.
Although most Americans could not engage in the scientific projection of

population trends, they were aware that large numbers of immigrants, both
legal and illegal, were entering the country. They also were aware of the cul-
tural changes brought about by immigration. In southern Florida, Texas, Cal-
ifornia, and other parts of the country, English-speaking Americans heard
languages they could not understand and came into contact with unfamiliar
cultures. Thus, both concern over the amount of immigration and reactions
to cultural changes fueled the perception of an immigration crisis.
Economic Concerns over Immigration Many of those who feel that the
flow of immigrants into the United States constitutes a crisis maintain that
immigration poses serious economic problems. Immigrants, they argue, com-
pete for jobs with people already living in the United States. Under U.S. im-
migration policy, there are two primary reasons that people from other coun-
tries can receive an immigrant visa that gives them permission to settle in the
United States. The first reason concerns family: People who have family mem-
bers who are citizens of or residents in the United States are given priority in
the granting of immigrant visas. The second reason concerns employment:
People with special professional abilities or workers arriving to take jobs for
which Americans are in short supply are eligible for visas.
Roy Beck, a liberal activist and an advocate of limiting immigration, ar-
gued that those who receive permission to immigrate for purposes of employ-
ment do so at the expense of employees already in the United States. He
374
pointed out that immigration lawyers, who help people find ways to enter the
United States, frequently work for businesses that wish to employ foreign la-
bor. These lawyers, according to Beck, help employers draw up job descrip-
tions that make it appear that no qualified American workers are available so
that the employers can import cheaper foreign workers.
George Borjas, an economist specializing in immigration issues, main-
tained that high levels of immigration pose a problem for low-income Ameri-
can workers. Borjas observed that most immigrants enter the United States to
join family members, and these immigrants tend to have few job skills and lit-
tle educational background. Therefore, immigrants were more likely than
other people to rely on public assistance, making them a financial burden,
and they competed for jobs with low-skilled, low-income natives. In 1996,
Borjas estimated that immigration had been the source of about one-third of
a recent decline in the wages of less-educated American workers.
Cultural Concerns over Immigration Some of those alarmed over the

influx of immigrants saw it as a cultural crisis. They claimed that immigrants
were arriving in such large numbers, with cultures that were so foreign to the
existing culture of the United States, that they could not be assimilated
readily into American culture.
Journalist Peter Brimelow maintained that immigration posed a crisis for
American political culture. The arrival of masses of immigrants who did not
speak English, according to Brimelow and others, threatened the position
of English as a language understood everywhere around the country. More-
over, cultural critics of immigration argued that newly arrived Mexicans, Do-
minicans, and Chinese identified with their own cultural backgrounds rather
than with mainstream American culture. Therefore, critics such as Brimelow
claimed that immigration endangered national unity.
Some of those who believe that massive immigration could create a crisis
for U.S. political culture argue that immigration is especially dangerous for
African Americans. They point out that African Americans were likely to be
replaced as the nation’s largest minority and that this would decrease this
group’s political power. Many opponents of immigration also maintained
that new immigrants would have little commitment to overcoming the racial
inequality created by the history of slavery and discrimination in the United
States.
Responses to Claims of Crisis Although no one denies that immigration

increased greatly in the years following 1965, many political figures and schol-
ars question whether this should be seen as an immigration “crisis.” Econo-
mist Julian Simon argued that immigrants were frequently energetic and in-
dustrious and could create, not simply compete for, jobs. The economy of
southern Florida, for example, boomed as a result of the activities of Cuban
immigrants. Many supporters of immigration, including 1996 vice presiden-
tial candidate Jack Kemp, maintained that immigration was an economic
375
Immigration law
blessing, since immigrants often performed work in areas that were experi-
encing labor shortages.
A number of observers believed that the influx of immigrants posed no
threat to American culture. They pointed out that American culture had
changed continually throughout its history. Moreover, the sociologist Ale-
jandro Portes and other scholars cited evidence that the children of immi-
grants overwhelmingly became fluent in English and were often weaker in
their parents’ languages than they were in English.
Further Reading Roy Beck’s The Case Against Immigration (New York:
W. W. Norton, 1996) presents an economic argument for seeing immigration
as a crisis. Immigration: Opposing Viewpoints (San Diego: Greenhaven Press,
2004), edited by Mary E. Williams, presents a variety of social, political, and
legal viewpoints of experts and observers familiar with immigration into the
United States. Peter Brimelow’s Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Im-
migration Disaster (New York: Random House, 1995) provides a controversial
but readable argument for drastically reducing immigration to the United
States. The articles in Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant
Impulse in the United States (New York: New York University Press, 1997), edited
by Juan F. Perea, examine the backlash against immigrants and place it in the
context of U.S. history. Henry Bischoff’s Immigration Issues (Westport, Conn.:
Greenwood Press, 2002) is a collection of balanced discussions about the
most important and most controversial issues relating to immigration. For a
balanced discussion of the economic impact of illegal immigration on Ameri-
can society, see The Economics of Illegal Immigration (New York: Palgrave Mac-
millan, 2005) by Chisato Yoshida and Alan D. Woodland.
See also Demographics of immigration; Immigration and Nationality Act

of 1965; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Justice and immigration;
Migration.
Immigration law
Definition: Branch of federal law dealing with the entry and settlement in
the United States of noncitizens
Immigration issues: Border control; Citizenship and naturalization; Civil

rights and liberties; Discrimination; Government and politics; Law en-
forcement; Laws and treaties; Refugees
376
Immigration law
Significance: U.S. immigration laws have changed dramatically since the na-
tion was formed during the late eighteenth century. These laws have di-
rectly affected tens of millions of people and have indirectly affected even
more people in such areas as civil rights, the distribution of wealth, em-
ployment, labor policy, foreign relations, and freedom of association.
Immigration law is one of several areas of legal specialization, such as estate

planning, domestic relations, tax law, or criminal law. Immigration lawyers
serve two types of clients: individual immigrants and American businesses
that have hired or wish to hire immigrants. They help their clients by provid-
ing advice on immigration law, by assisting them in choosing to apply for a
particular immigration status, by providing appropriate forms, by helping cli-
ents complete and file immigration petitions, and by representing clients
who must justify their claims to an immigrant status or appeal a decision of
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) or other agency.
Although persons need not obtain professional legal assistance in order to
migrate to the United States, American immigration laws are complicated
and expert advice can sometimes be helpful. Those whose applications for
migration have been refused and who file appeals are usually well advised to
turn to a professional immigration attorney. People who face deportation
hearings need expert legal advice.
Laws regarding areas of lawyer specialization differ from state to state.
Some states recognize specialization through self-designation. Under this sys-
tem, attorneys who specialize in immigration law list themselves as experts in
this area and can present themselves as such to the public. Generally, states
that allow attorneys to designate themselves as specialists in a particular area
require three years of practice and about thirty hours of legal education in
the specific area before the designation can be recognized. Other states have
certification systems. Under a certification system, an attorney who wishes to
be recognized as an immigration lawyer must take an examination, similar to
the bar examination, in this area of specialty.
Basic Immigration Legislation All American immigration law is set by

the United States government, not the separate states. Therefore, although
immigration lawyers must pass state bar examinations to practice law and the
states set the conditions and qualifications that lawyers must meet to special-
ize in immigration law, these lawyers are chiefly concerned with federal legis-
lation. The main outlines of immigration and naturalization law in the
United States after World War II were set by the Immigration and Nationality
Act of 1952, better known as the McCarran-Walter Act. The 1952 act contin-
ued the national origins system of granting visas that the U.S. Congress had
adopted during the 1920’s. Under this system, legal immigration was largely
restricted to people from western European countries. Provisions of the
McCarran-Walter Act barred from immigration communists, subversives, or
anyone judged by the INS to have advocated communist ideas.
377
Immigration law
The “immigration” part of this act was largely replaced by the Immigration
and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965, which abolished the national ori-
gins system in favor of a preference system based on family reunification, job
skills of migrants, and refugee status. The McCarran-Walter Act, however,
continued to be the basis of American naturalization policy. Under the condi-
tions set forth in that act, before noncitizens can apply for U.S. citizenship,
they must be at least eighteen years of age and have been legal residents of the
United States for at least five years. Persons applying for citizenship must have
lived in the state in which they file a petition for at least six months before pe-
titioning the court. In most cases, petitioners for American citizenship must
be able to speak, read, and write English. Moreover, applicants must demon-
strate knowledge of American history and government.
The 1965 amendments greatly increased immigration law practice in the
United States in several ways. First, they led to a wave of immigration to the
United States, creating a large group of potential users of the services of im-
migration lawyers. Second, the complex system of preferences created a de-
mand for experts who could provide advice on the best way to obtain permis-
sion to settle in the United States. Third, increasing the importance of job
skills as an avenue for immigration created incentives for American busi-
nesses to seek out the services of immigration lawyers. Businesses wishing to
hire noncitizens often find it useful to obtain professional advice on how to
get visas for prospective employees.
Concern over illegal immigration led to the Immigration Reform and
Control Act (IRCA) of 1986. This act established fines for employers who hire
illegal aliens and offered legal status to aliens who had entered the country il-
legally before January 1, 1982. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immi-
grant Responsibility Act of 1996 was also primarily aimed at clamping down
on illegal immigration. Among other provisions, the act streamlined deporta-
tion proceedings, making it easier and faster to deport foreigners who lacked
proper documents. Persons seeking political asylum who arrived in the
United States with falsified or borrowed documents could be held at the bor-
der and denied asylum unless they could demonstrate a “credible fear” of per-
secution in their homelands.
Each new piece of legislation has created new conditions and complica-
tions surrounding immigration and has therefore contributed to the growth
of immigration law as a specialty. Immigration attorneys contributing pro
bono services have assisted those seeking asylum in the United States, such as
refugees from Central America, who are under threat of immediate deporta-
tion.
Essentials of American Immigration Law The basis of immigration law

is a system of visa categories. A visa is a stamp placed in a passport by an Ameri-
can consulate outside the United States. In order to immigrate to the United
States, persons’ passports must contain a stamp indicating to which legal cate-
gory they belong. Immigration attorneys or other knowledgeable persons
378
Immigration law
Work Performed by Immigration Lawyers

Immigration lawyers, who work with immigrants and with businesses employ-
ing or desiring to hire immigrants:
• Analyze the facts in the case of someone desiring to immigrate
• Explain all benefits for which immigrants may be eligible
• Recommend the best way to obtain legal immigrant status
• Complete and file appropriate applications
• Keep up with new laws affecting their clients
• Speak for clients in discussions with the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-
vice (INS)
• Represent clients in court
• File necessary appeals and waivers
Adapted from: American Immigration and Lawyers Association, “A Guide to Consumer Protection and
Authorized Representation,” Washington, D.C .: AILA, 1998.
can help immigrants identify the best category. There are two major classes of
visas. The first class is the permanent residence visa. After entry into the
United States, the INS issues alien registration cards, commonly known as
“green cards,” to those who receive this type of visa. Noncitizens who have
permanent resident status have the right to live permanently and work in the
United States. Usually, only people who have immediate family members re-
siding in the United States or who have job skills demanded by U.S. employ-
ers can obtain this type of visa. The second class of visa is the nonimmigrant
visa. This type of visa is issued for vacations, study, or temporary employment.
The U.S. government issues an unrestricted number of nonimmigrant vi-
sas, but permanent residence visas are limited by quotas established by Con-
gress.
Different groups of people have different chances of receiving permanent
residence status in each annual quota. These groups are called preferences.
The first preference consists of unmarried children, of any age, of U.S. citi-
zens. Spouses of green card holders and unmarried children of green card
holders fall into the second preference. This means that after the unmarried
children of U.S. citizens who have applied for U.S. residence in a given year
have been granted visas, quota slots begin to be filled by spouses and unmar-
ried children of green card holders. The third preference goes to profession-
als and persons of exceptional ability in the arts and sciences who come to the
United States to work for American employers. Married children, of any age,
of U.S. citizens receive the fourth preference. The fifth preference goes to
noncitizen sisters and brothers of U.S. citizens. Skilled and unskilled workers
coming to take jobs for which American workers are in short supply are classi-
fied as the sixth preference.
379
Immigration law
Husbands and wives of citizens do not fall under the quota system. This
means that marrying a U.S. citizen is one of the easiest legal ways to settle per-
manently in the United States. The 1986 Immigration Marriage Fraud Act
Amendments amended the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, because it
was believed that marriage fraud was a serious problem. These amendments
impose a two-year conditional residency requirement on alien spouses and
children before they are eligible for permanent residency status on the basis
of marriage. Couples must file a petition within the last ninety days of the con-
ditional status period, after which the INS interviews them to establish that
they have not divorced or had their marriages annulled and that they have
not been married solely for the purpose of obtaining entry to the United
States. Under the 1986 amendments, marriage fraud for the purpose of im-
migration may be punishable by up to five years imprisonment and up to
$250,000 in fines. Marriage fraud can also be grounds for deportation and a
bar to future immigration.
Refugees and political asylum seekers also do not fall under the quota sys-
tem. These are people who have been forced to flee their native countries be-
cause of political oppression. A refugee is someone who has been granted
permission to enter the United States before arriving. Political asylum is
granted to persons only after they have entered the country. Those entering
as refugees may apply for green cards one year after they arrive. Those who do
not enter as refugees and receive political asylum may become eligible two
years after asylum is granted.
Exclusion and Deportation Exclusion is the barring of noncitizens

from entering the United States. Deportation is the prohibiting of nonciti-
zens who have already entered the United States, either legally or illegally,
from remaining and sending them back to their countries of origin. The
United States government has decided that certain categories of people are
undesirable and that these people should be excluded. Excludable aliens in-
clude those with tuberculosis, those with physical or mental disorders that
may threaten others, those who have been convicted of committing certain
crimes, those who are judged to be threats to national security, those who
have previously violated immigration laws, those who practice polygamy, and
those who engage in international child abduction.
As waivers are available in many exclusion cases, immigration attorneys
can apply for and help persons obtain waivers. The INS decides when an in-
dividual falls into an excludable category and it is responsible for issuing or
refusing to issue waivers. If a waiver application is denied or if a potential im-
migrant claims that a judgment of exclusion was a mistake, the decision of
the INS may be appealed in a U.S. district court. As in all appeals cases, per-
sons appealing should seek the representation of a qualified immigration at-
torney.
There are two broad categories of deportable aliens: those deportable for
acts committed before or during entry to the United States and those deport-
380
Immigration law
able for acts committed since their entry. American citizens cannot be de-
ported. Some aliens, including ambassadors, diplomats, public ministers,
and members of their families, are also exempt from deportation. Aliens may
be deported because they were excludable to begin with and misrepresented
themselves in order to enter the country. A 1978 amendment to the Immigra-
tion and Nationality Act allowed the INS to deport aliens who participated in
Nazi activities during World War II on the grounds that they committed acts
before arriving in the United States that exclude them from remaining in the
country. Immigrants who have entered the country illegally without inspec-
tion may be deported for illegal entry. Those deportable for conduct after en-
try include subversives, or people who advocate the violent overthrow of the
government, and those who have committed serious crimes and have been
sentenced to prison within five years after entry.
Persons who have crossed the border into the United States without
proper documents are frequently deported immediately. However, persons
who can reasonably claim to be seeking political asylum or contest their de-
portation may be granted a deportation hearing. Deportation hearings begin
officially with the issuance of an order to immigrants to show why they are not
deportable. Such hearings generally involve a judge, a trial attorney, immi-
grants’ counsel, and sometimes an interpreter. Immigration judges are se-
lected by the U.S. attorney general. The trial attorney has the job of showing
why the immigrant should be deported and is therefore comparable to a pros-
ecutor in criminal law. Immigrants’ counsel is not necessarily an attorney, al-
though attorneys are often the individuals best qualified to aid defendants in
deportation hearings. According to the United States Code of Federal Regu-
lations, various types of persons may serve as counsel for aliens in a deporta-
tion hearing: attorneys who are members of the highest court of any state, law
students and law graduates under some circumstances who have not yet been
admitted to the bar, representatives of organizations recognized by the Board
of Immigration Appeals, accredited officials of aliens’ own governments, cer-
tain persons who meet criteria established by legal statute, attorneys outside
the United States licensed to practice law in their own countries, and amici cu-
riae, friends of the court whom the court recognizes as providing useful infor-
mation. Under the law, the immigration judge at a deportation hearing must
advise aliens of the availability of free legal services.
Major Organizations of Immigration Lawyers The largest and best-

known organization of immigration lawyers is the American Immigration
Lawyers Association (AILA). Its more than 5,200 members are all lawyers spe-
cializing in immigration and nationality law. The AILA was founded in 1946
as the Association of Immigration and Nationality Lawyers and changed its
name in 1981. Based in Washington, D.C., the AILA publishes a newsletter,
the AILA Monthly, which has a circulation of 3,800, and the annual Immigra-
tion and Nationality Law Handbook.
The AILA has thirty-four local chapters in different regions of the country.
381
Immigration law
It offers a mentor program, in which experienced immigration lawyers an-

swer the questions of other members. Its Young Lawyers Division is open to all
members aged thirty-six or younger or who have been members of the organi-
zation for less than three years. This division provides education and training
for younger and newer members. The AILA holds an annual conference that
offers panels, workshops, and professional education. Although the AILA ex-
ists primarily to promote the interests and professional development of its
members, it also seeks to influence immigration policies. Staff and members
at its Washington, D.C., headquarters maintain contact with the INS and
other federal agencies involved in implementing immigration policies.
With only about fifty members, the Association of Immigration Attorneys
(AIA), based in New York, is a much smaller organization. It was founded in
1983, and all of its members are attorneys specializing in immigration. In ad-
dition to representing the interests of immigration lawyers, the AIA is an ad-
vocacy group that seeks to assert the legal rights of aliens, lobbies the U.S.
Congress on behalf of noncitizens, and attempts to bring about legislation to
improve the position of legal aliens in the United States.
The National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers’ Guild (NIP/
NLG), based in Boston, is an organization of five hundred members. Founded
in 1973, its members include lawyers, law students, and legal workers. It seeks
to defend the civil liberties of foreign-born persons living in the United States
and to help noncitizens who have legal problems with immigration. The Proj-
ect also holds seminars to improve the legal skills of its members.
Many local bar associations also sponsor volunteer legal services projects
for immigrants. These provide legal representation to those facing deporta-
tion hearings or those who have other relevant legal needs. Bar associations
often maintain referral services that provide the names of attorneys who do
pro bono immigration work—that is, attorneys who provide their services
free of charge. One of the most notable pro bono projects has been ProBAR
in Texas. This is a project that provides free legal counsel, from lawyers and
law students, to Central Americans in South Texas who are seeking political
asylum.
Further Reading Perhaps the best tool with which to begin any study of
immigration law is a basic glossary, such as Bill Ong Hing’s Immigration and the
Law: A Dictionary (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 1999). Guidebooks pro-
vide information on American immigration law in a fashion that can be eas-
ily understood by nonlawyers. U.S. Immigration and Citizenship: Your Complete
Guide (Rocklin, Calif.: Prima Publishing, 1997) by Allan Wernick, a top immi-
gration lawyer, is one of the best guides for those interested in visiting or set-
tling in the United States. Wernick explains the U.S. immigration system, de-
tails who can immigrate, and provides tips for dealing with the Immigration
and Naturalization Service. Aliza Becker’s Citizenship for Us: A Handbook on
382
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
Naturalization and Citizenship (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Legal Immigration

Network, 2002) is another practical guide to immigration law written for
nonlawyers. Also useful is Carl R. Baldwin’s Immigration Questions and Answers
(3d ed. New York: Allworth Press, 2002). A handbook for immigration at-
torneys that looks at immigration law in post-September 11, 2001, America is
Iris D. Gomez’s Representing Non-citizens and INS Detainees: Resolving Problems in
the Current Climate of Uncertainty (Boston: MCLE, 2003). Stephen H. Legom-
sky’s Immigration and Refugee Law and Policy (3d ed. New York: Foundation
Press, 2002) is an authoritative legal textbook on immigration and refugee law.
Employment immigration, the other primary type of legal immigration, is
handled in Bill Ong Hing’s Handling Immigration Cases (New York: John Wiley
& Sons, 1995), a guide for lawyers handling immigration cases related to em-
ployment. Gerald L. Neuman’s Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders,
and Fundamental Law (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996) is an
academic consideration of the problems involved in applying U.S. constitu-
tional law to noncitizens and a discussion of case-law interpretations of immi-
grant rights. For a general history of American immigration law, see U.S. Im-
migration and Naturalization Laws and Issues: A Documentary History (Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1999), edited by Michael C. LeMay and Elliott Rob-
ert Barkan, which is supported by extensive extracts from documents. In Im-
migration and the Politics of American Sovereignty, 1890-1990 (Ann Arbor: Univer-
sity of Michigan Press, 2001), Cheryl Shanks examines changing federal
immigration laws from the late nineteenth through the late twentieth centu-
ries, with particular attention to changing quota systems and exclusionary
policies.
and Nationality Act of 1965; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immi-
gration Reform and Control Act of 1986; Naturalization Act of 1790; Page
law; War Brides Act.
Immigration Reform and

Control Act of 1986
The Law: Federal legislation on illegal aliens
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Cuban immigrants;

Laws and treaties
383
Significance: The Immigration Reform and Control Act provided for the le-
galization of illegal aliens and established sanctions against employers who
hire undocumented workers.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was signed into law by
President Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986. The act amended the Immi-
gration and Nationality Act of 1965 and was based in part on the findings and
recommendations of the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee
Policy (1978-1981). In its 1981 report to Congress, this commission had pro-
posed that the United States continue to accept large numbers of immigrants
and enact a program of amnesty for undocumented aliens already in the
United States. To deter migration of undocumented aliens to the United
States, the commission also proposed to make the employment of illegal
aliens a punishable offense.
Development of the Bill These proposals were incorporated into the

Simpson-Mazzoli bill, a first version of which was introduced in 1982. In the
five years between its introduction and its enactment, the bill ran into opposi-
tion from a variety of quarters. Agricultural interests, especially growers of
perishable commodities, were concerned that the proposed employer sanc-
tions would jeopardize their labor supply. Mexican American advocacy groups
also opposed employer sanctions, while organized labor and restrictionists
who were concerned about the massive influx of foreign workers favored em-
ployer sanctions. Many liberals and humanitarians supported the notion of
legalizing the status of undocumented aliens and expressed concerns over
potential discrimination against them.
During the 1980’s, the bill repeatedly was pronounced dead only to be re-
vived again as various lawmakers, notably Representatives Leon Panetta,
Charles Schumer, and Peter Rodino, introduced compromises and amend-
ments to respond to their constituencies or to overcome opposition by con-
gressional factions. Differences also developed between the House Democratic
leadership and the Republican White House over funding the legalization
program. On October 15, 1986, the House at last approved the bill, by a
vote of 238 to 173; the Senate approved the bill on October 17, by a vote of
63 to 24.
Provisions The major components of the Immigration Reform and Con-

trol Act provided for the control of illegal immigration (Title I), the legaliza-
tion of undocumented aliens (Title II), and the reform of legal immigration
(Title III). Other sections of the act provided for reports to Congress (Title
IV), state assistance for the incarceration costs of illegal aliens and certain Cu-
ban nationals (Title V), the creation of a commission for the study of interna-
tional migration and cooperative economic development (Title VI), and fed-
eral responsibility for deportable and excludable aliens convicted of crimes
(Title VII).
384
A major objective of the IRCA, the control of illegal immigration, was to be

achieved by imposing sanctions on employers. The IRCA made it unlawful for
any person knowingly to hire, recruit, or refer for a fee any alien not autho-
rized to work in the United States. Before hiring new employees, employers
would be required to examine certain specified documents to verify a job ap-
plicant’s identity and authority to work.
The act established civil and criminal penalties, and employers could be
fined up to two thousand dollars per unauthorized alien, even for a first of-
fense. Employers who demonstrated a pattern of knowingly hiring undocu-
mented aliens could face felony penalties of up to six months’ imprisonment
and/or a three-thousand-dollar fine per violation. Employers also were re-
quired to keep appropriate records. Failure to do so could result in a civil fine
of up to one thousand dollars. In order to allow time for a public education
campaign to become effective, penalties against employers for hiring undoc-
umented aliens were not phased in until June, 1987.
The second major objective of the IRCA, the legalization of undocu-
mented aliens, was to be realized by granting temporary residence status to
aliens who had entered the United States illegally prior to January 1, 1982,
and who had resided in the United States continuously since then. They
could be granted permanent residence status after eighteen months if they
could demonstrate a minimal understanding of English and some knowledge
of the history and government of the United States. After a five-year period of
permanent residence, they would become eligible for citizenship.
The act also permitted the attorney general to grant legal status to aliens
who could show that they had entered the United States prior to January,
1972, and lived in the country since then. Newly legalized aliens were barred
from most forms of public assistance for five years, although exceptions could
be made for emergency medical care, aid to the blind or disabled, or other as-
sistance deemed to be in the interest of public health.
To assure passage of the bill, support of the growers in the West and South-
west was essential. After protracted negotiations, the growers succeeded in
getting the kind of legislation that assured them of a continued supply of tem-
porary agricultural workers. The new program differed from earlier bracero
programs by providing for the legalization of special agricultural workers
who could work anywhere and who could become eligible for permanent res-
ident status or for citizenship. The IRCA granted temporary residence status
to aliens who had performed field labor in perishable agricultural commodi-
ties in the United States for at least ninety days during the twelve-month pe-
riod ending May 1, 1986, as well as to persons who could demonstrate to the
Immigration and Naturalization Service that they had performed appropri-
ate agricultural field labor for ninety days in three successive previous years
while residing in the United States for six months in each year.
The act also revised and expanded an existing temporary foreign worker
program known as H-2. In case of a shortage of seasonal farmworkers, em-
ployers could apply to the secretary of labor no more than sixty days in ad-
385
vance of needing workers. The employer also was required to try to recruit
domestic workers for the jobs. H-2 also provided that during fiscal years 1990-
1993, additional special agricultural workers could be admitted to temporary
residence status as “replenishment workers.” Their admission was contingent
upon certification of the need for such workers by the secretaries of labor and
of agriculture. Replenishment workers who performed ninety days of field
work in perishable agricultural commodities in each of the first three years
would be eligible for permanent resident status. They were, however, disqual-
ified from public assistance. In order to become eligible for citizenship, they
would have to perform seasonal agricultural services for ninety days during
five separate years.
The IRCA also provided permanent resident status for a hundred thou-
sand specified Cubans and Haitians who entered the United States prior to
January 1, 1982. The law increased quotas from former colonies and depen-
dencies from five hundred to six thousand and provided for the admission of
five thousand immigrants annually for two years, to be chosen from nationals
of thirty-six countries with low rates of immigration. Altogether, the Immigra-
tion Reform and Control Act led to the legalization of the status of three mil-
lion aliens; however, IRCA was not as successful in curbing illegal immigra-
tion as had been anticipated.
Mindful of the potential for discrimination, Congress established an Of-
fice of Special Counsel in the Department of Justice to investigate and prose-
cute charges of discrimination connected with unlawful immigration prac-
tices. The act also required states to verify the status of noncitizens applying
for public aid and provided that states be reimbursed for the implementation
costs of this provision. To reimburse states for the public assistance, health,
and education costs resulting from legalizing aliens, the act provided for the
appropriation of one billion dollars in each of the four fiscal years following
its enactment.
Helmut J. Schmeller
Further Reading
Bean, Frank D., Georges Vernez, and Charles B. Keely. Opening and Closing the
Doors: Evaluating Immigration Reform and Control. Washington, D.C.: Rand
Corporation and the Urban Institute, 1989. Scholarly study of the IRCA of
1986, its implementation, and its impact on illegal immigration.
Daniels, Roger. “The 1980s and Beyond.” In Coming to America: A History of Im-
migration and Ethnicity in American Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1990.
Brief, critical discussion of the IRCA, with special emphasis on the act’s am-
nesty provision.
Fuchs, Lawrence H. The American Kaleidoscope: Race, Ethnicity, and the Civic Cul-
ture. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1990. Concise, well-
documented discussion of the act by the executive director of the staff of
the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy.
386
Indentured servitude
ABC-Clio, 1999. Useful general reference on immigration law.
Includes discussions of the immigration laws of 1986 and 1996.
law.
Zolberg, Aristide R. “Reforming the Back Door: The Immigration Reform
and Control Act of 1986 in Historical Perspective.” In Immigration Recon-
sidered: History, Sociology, and Politics, edited by Virginia Yans-McLaughlin.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Comprehensive, well-documented
account of the genesis of the IRCA, with particular emphasis on the legisla-
tive history.
and Nationality Act of 1965; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immi-
gration law; Naturalization Act of 1790; Page law; War Brides Act.
Definition: System whereby immigrants contract to work for specified pe-
riods for persons who pay the costs of their travel expenses
Immigration issues: Economics; European immigrants; Families and mar-

riage; Labor; Slavery; Women
Significance: During the American colonial period, tens of thousands of

people—mostly Europeans—sold their future labor in return for passage
387
to the New World. Approximately 20 percent of these indentured servants

were women.
During the early decades of Great Britain’s North American colonization,

the London Company needed workers to settle in its mid-Atlantic colony.
At the same time, there were those in England who wanted to emigrate
but did not have the funds. Meeting both needs, the system of indentured
servitude brought tens of thousands of colonists to the New World, until
the harsher system of slavery overtook it. The largest number of the inden-
tured servants who came to North America came to the Chesapeake Bay Col-
ony. Between the 1650’s and the start of the American Revolution, some
twenty thousand such servants arrived; of these, about four thousand were
women.
Servants normally agreed to an indenture of three to seven years, with the
average being four. Those with skills generally negotiated shorter periods,
while the unskilled had to settle for the longest time. All indentured servants,
regardless of skill, age, or gender, incurred the same debts emigrating to the
colonies. To pay those obligations, they sold their future labor in the inden-
ture contract.
The majority of indentured servants were between the ages of ten and
forty. Younger children would have been more of a liability than an asset, and
given the life expectancy of the time, workers beyond forty may well have died
before the indenture was completed, thus costing the master more than they
were worth. The peak age for indentured servants was between fifteen and
twenty-five. While the men were generally in their teens, the women tended
to enter an indenture in their early twenties. Most were done with service be-
fore their thirtieth birthday.
During the seventeenth century, most indentured servants came from En-
gland. In the eighteenth century, the majority came from Ireland or Europe
as “redemptioners.” Ship captains paid their passage, and the immigrants
hoped that friends or relatives would pay for their passage and “redeem”
them in the New World. Failing that end, the captain would sell them into ser-
vitude.
Whether they came from England or elsewhere, or whether they came in
the seventeenth or eighteenth century, men were preferred as indentured
servants over women. In the earlier time, as a result of the shortage of women
in the colonies, a premium was paid for female servants, and perhaps as
many as 25 percent of the servants were women; in the second century of co-
lonialism, women made up only 10 percent of indentured servants. As the
gender ratio equalized in the colonies, fewer women came as indentured ser-
vants.
Most servants signed their indentures—agreements that spelled out their
rights and obligations, terms of service, and what was due upon conclusion of
the contract—before they sailed. Some indentured servants were convicts,
and a few were kidnapped or shanghaied. In return for providing food, cloth-
388
ing, and shelter, the master received the labor of the servant for the specified
time. The master was to avoid cruel and unusual punishment, although ser-
vants could be whipped, branded, or even hanged for infractions.
Servants agreed to work, not to marry without their masters’ permission,
and not to run away. The servants, their labor, and all their possessions be-
longed to the masters, who could trade, lend, auction, or sell their servants.
Servants could be separated from their families. They had few rights, and
while the contracts were enforced in the courts, judgments generally favored
the masters. In fact, during the time of the contract, most servants had no
more rights than slaves. Once freed, if they lived that long, servants might rise
to the rank of small landholders. Upon freedom, masters provided servants
with their freedom dues, including clothes, tools, guns, and perhaps as much
as fifty acres of land.
Indentured servants were cheaper for masters than hiring free labor. They
performed all sorts of tasks, both skilled and unskilled. Most female inden-
tured servants worked in their masters’ homes, in contrast to the men, who
worked in the fields and shops of their masters. Because the women worked
in close proximity to the families, masters generally paid more attention to
their references and their character.
Women generally had lower skill levels than men and were, therefore, re-
stricted in the types of jobs that they were given. Most worked in domestic ser-
vice, which included tasks ranging from emptying an overflowing chamber
pot to starting the fire before the family arose to the more traditional femi-
nine occupations of sewing, carding wool, and spinning. They also washed
and ironed clothes and did other, similar types of domestic service. Child care
occupied the largest amount of the female servant’s time. Women worked as
nursemaids and nannies, caring for children and adults alike. Occasionally,
female servants did field work, although most worked in the house, often
sleeping on the floor at the foot of the mistress’ bed.
Abuses Women faced abuses that were different, and often harsher, than
those of their male counterparts. Running away was one of the more common
methods of coping with an abusive situation. Masters generally complained
that female servants ran away either to rejoin a lover or because they were
pregnant. In addition to the general penalties accorded all indentured ser-
vants, women bore the additional burden of pregnancy. A pregnant servant
had additional time added to her indenture to cover her “crime.” She then
had to serve even more time to reimburse her master for time lost during her
confinement and any expenses associated with the care and feeding of the in-
fant, even though in many cases the master was the child’s father.
A female servant’s best hope was marriage. Two servants who married
combined their freedom dues; marrying a freeman, however, improved her
position more. A higher percentage of seventeenth century servants were
women whose indentures were bought at a premium, likely with the intention
of marriage.
389
A minority of indentured servants, both male and female, were convicts

whose choice was death or imprisonment in England or transportation as in-
dentured servants to the colonies. While some colonies would accept female
convicts as house servants, others would take them only as field hands and
still others had laws forbidding their introduction completely. Though part
of the reason for transportation was reformation, there is no evidence that
the process had any positive effects.
Upon conclusion of the indenture, success in the New World was far from
guaranteed, and women had a harder time than men. During the late seven-
teenth century, two-thirds of Philadelphia’s poor house residents were women.
Furthermore, the long-term residents were more likely to be female. Gen-
erally, women who completed their indenture had few opportunities to sup-
port themselves and nowhere to go, and they often were forced into the poor
house.
Duncan R. Jamieson
Further Reading
Galenson, David W. White Servitude in Colonial America. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Menard, Russell R. Migrants, Servants, and Slaves: Unfree Labor in Colonial Brit-
ish America. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2001.
tory. Washington Square, N.Y.: New York University Press, 2001.
Salinger, Sharon V. “To Serve Well and Faithfully”: Labor and Indentured Servants
in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press, 1987.
Smith, Abbot Emerson. Colonists in Bondage: White Servitude and Convict Labor
in America, 1607-1776. New York: W. W. Norton, 1971.
Van der Zee, John. Bound Over: Indentured Servitude and American Conscience.
New York: Simon & Schuster, 1985.
See also Asian Indian immigrants; British as dominant group; Chinese

American Citizens Alliance; Chinese detentions in New York; History of U.S.
immigration; Latinos; Racial and ethnic demographic trends; Women immi-
grants; Wong Kim Ark case.
390
Indigenous superordination
Indigenous
superordination
Definition: Intergroup relationship in which members of a “native” domi-
nant group within a geographical area subordinates members of incoming
immigrant groups
Immigration issues: Discrimination; Nativism and racism; Sociological the-

ories
Significance: The process of indigenous superordination results in a partic-

ular form of stratification within the society in which the resident domi-
nant group enjoys a disproportionate share of the resources, prestige, and
power.
The differential among groups may be manifest in economic, political, or cul-

tural realms, interactively. The power relationship is then justified by a system
of beliefs that rationalizes the superiority of the indigenous group in relation
to the incoming groups and that often scapegoats the immigrants by plac-
Image Not Available
391
Iranian immigrants
ing blame on them as the cause of various societal problems. This type of
superordinate-subordinate group relationship is less overtly conflictual than
migrant superordination. An example of indigenous superordination is found
in the United States, where most voluntary immigrants occupy lower levels of
the stratification system.
M. Bahati Kuumba
Further Reading
See also British as dominant group; Immigrant advantage; Migrant super-

ordination.
Iranian immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Middle Eastern na-
tion of Iran
Significance: Since November, 1979, when Iranian student militants seized

the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held sixty-six Americans hostage while de-
manding the return of Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi from his exile in the
United States, most Americans have held strongly unfavorable opinions of
Iranian Americans. Iranian Americans face a constant struggle to convince
other groups in the United States that they personally are not terrorists
and do not support the Islamic government in Iran.
The trauma of the 1979 Iranian revolution and subsequent terror and eco-
nomic deterioration, combined with the long war with Iraq, resulted in wide-
spread dispersions of Iranians outside their homeland. It is estimated that be-
tween 1.2 million and 2 million Iranian Americans live in the United States.
The majority of Iranian immigrants live in suburban areas such as Los An-
geles, Washington, D.C., and Long Island, New York, and hold middle-class
jobs.
392
Iranian immigrants
Iranian Immigration to the United States,

1925-2003
12,000 1978-1979
Iranian
11,000 Revolution
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000 1980-1988
5,000 Iran-Iraq War
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
1925-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Since the Iranian Revolution and the taking of the U.S. embassy, images of
Iranians as unpredictable and wild anti-American fanatics and terrorists have
dominated the minds of the American public, according to Ali Akbar Mahdi,
an Iranian scholar at Ohio Wesleyan University. For example, when the fed-
eral building in Oklahoma City was bombed on April 19, 1995, at first many
Americans believed that Middle East terrorists were responsible. Living in
such a negative environment is a difficult but conscious choice for most first-
generation Iranian immigrants. Second-generation Iranians also suffer from
the negative images associated with the national origins of their parents.
Mahdi wrote that the presence of many Iranian immigrants in Western
countries is partially due to the religionization of Iranian society. Most of the
Iranian immigrants are secular people who do not want to mix religion with
politics and education. He said that most of the Iranian immigrants in the
United States consist of middle- and upper-class people who are highly edu-
cated and have a better-than-average standard of living. Many of those who
came from more modest backgrounds have secured middle-class positions
for themselves through education, dedication, and hard work.
Relations with Other Groups Iranians who came to the United States
before the hostage crisis received a generally positive reception. However, af-
393
Iranian immigrants
ter that crisis and the ensuing rise of Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle
East, the American perception of Iran changed from a country of peace to a
country of turmoil and unpredictability. The U.S. State Department has la-
beled the Iranian government as a “rogue state.” The unfavorable portrayal
of Iranians in the U.S. media helps breed prejudice and discrimination, plac-
ing a strain on Iranian Americans. Some researchers accuse the United States
of using xenophobia and ungrounded fears to motivate its citizens to follow
the views of American political, religious, and cultural leaders. They say that
while the United States prides itself in its sociocultural diversity, it simulta-
neously denounces cultures it cannot understand.
A survey of 157 Iranian Americans conducted by Laleh Khalili, a graduate
student at Columbia University and published in The Iranian Times in April,
1998, showed that although 37 percent of respondents select mostly other Ira-
nian Americans as friends, 63 percent do not. Khalili found that those who
prefer friends who are not Iranian Americans associate with members of
other transnational communities rather than typical white Americans. The
most frequently mentioned areas of origin are Southeast Asia, the Middle
East, and Latin America. According to Khalili, a shared knowledge of what
crossing borders entails and similarities in sociopolitical backgrounds pro-
vide a context in which Iranians in the United States can operate comfortably.
Image Improvement In an effort to focus on the achievements of Iranian

Americans and not dwell on the faults of the Iranian government, some U.S.
governors in states such as New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Florida have
officially declared March 21, the Iranian celebration of the new year, as the
Day of Iranian Americans. In 1997, Governor Lawton Chiles of Florida said
that
Individuals of people of Iranian heritage have earned an esteemed place in the

cultural, economic, and social structure of Florida and have proved themselves
an asset to the community, with many of them holding positions in the fields of
medicine, research, education, law, business, the arts, and public services.
Chiles went on to call for continued mutual understanding and friendship

between established residents and those of Iranian descent. Manucher Sha-
hidi of Long Island, New York, one of the organizers of the movement to
make March 21 a special day in the United States, said that the celebration in-
volves being recognized as an official ethnic minority group in the United
States.
This gives us lobbying power in Congress, gives us the right to institute our cul-
ture and history into that of America, and most importantly, it guarantees that
the United States government will protect our cultural and historical integrity.
Marian Wynne Haber
394
Irish immigrants
Further Reading For comprehensive overviews of Iranians in the United

States, see Mitra K. Shavarini’s Educating Immigrants: Experiences of Second-
Generation Iranians (New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2004), Sandra
Donovan’s Iranians in America (Minneapolis: Lerner, 2006), Firoozeh Dumas’s
Funny in Farsi: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America (New York: Villard,
2003), Azadeh Moaveni’s Lipstick Jihad: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in
America and American in Iran (New York: Public Affairs, 2005), and Maboud
Ansari’s The Making of the Iranian Community in America (New York: Pardis
Press, 1992). Ellen Alexander Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Immigrants
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004) is a collection of firsthand ac-
counts of modern immigrants from many nations, including Iran. More gen-
eral works on Middle Eastern immigrants include Aladdin Elaasar’s Silent
Victims: The Plight of Arab and Muslim Americans in Post 9/11 America (Bloom-
ington, Ind.: AuthorHouse, 2004), Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad’s Not Quite Ameri-
can? The Shaping of Arab and Muslim Identity in the United States (Waco, Tex.:
Baylor University Press, 2004), and Amir B. Marvasti and Karyn D. McKin-
ney’s Middle Eastern Lives in America (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield,
2004).
See also Arab American stereotypes; Arab immigrants; Helsinki Watch re-
port on U.S. refugee policy; Middle Eastern immigrant families; Muslims;
Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
Irish immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Ireland
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants; Irish immi-

grants; Religion; Stereotypes
Significance: Irish Americans have been in the United States since the early
colonial period and have played an active role in the development of in-
dustry, in labor and social reform, and in politics at all levels. They also
profoundly influenced the development of many large cities and have had
a lasting influence on educational practices.
The Irish have been a vital component of American life since the days of co-
lonialism. The early Irish immigrants were mainly Presbyterian Protestants
from Ulster. Although some belonged to the Church of Ireland, most came in
search of financial gains. The majority of the Ulster-born Irish were tenant
farmers or skilled artisans of modest means. The Irish who would follow in
the famine years would be vastly different in their beliefs, their financial sta-
395
Irish immigrants
Irish American children waiting for New York City’s St. Patrick’s Day parade in 1951. An annual
event, the parade has long been an important expression of Irish pride. (Library of Congress)
tus, and their social standing. Each new wave of Irish immigrants would add
something to the fabric of American life.
The “Famine Irish” Whereas the earliest Irish immigrants had come to
the United States to better themselves, the “famine Irish” sought simple sur-
vival in an often hostile land. The Penal Laws in Ireland had long put native
Irish Catholics at a serious disadvantage in their homeland. Irish farmers
were uneducated, poor, and dependent upon their rocky plots of land for
subsistence. Families were large. The lifestyle was one of intense social inter-
action. They had little, but they shared what they had and celebrated their be-
liefs with tradition, song, dance, and religious ritual. They were dependent
upon the potato crop as their sole food source.
When blight struck the potato crop between the years 1845 and 1854, the
poor had nowhere to turn. Some had compassionate landlords. However,
when Parliament passed the Poor Law Extension Act of 1847, landlords be-
came responsible for the cost of care of their tenantry. Even well-meaning
landowners could not cover such expense. Evictions became the rule. The
396
Irish immigrants
poor then had the option of going to disease-infested workhouses or starving

on the road in search of food and shelter. They fled their native land strictly
for survival.
Between 1840 and 1860, more than 1.5 million Irish came to the shores of
the United States. They settled in cities, concentrating in certain neighbor-
hoods. A large contingent settled in New Orleans. Most of those who fled the
famine stayed in eastern cities such as New York or Boston simply because
they had no money and no marketable skills to move on. Some would move
toward Chicago or join the movement westward in search of employment.
Most of the famine Irish were poor and Catholic. They represented the first
large wave of non-Anglo-Saxon immigrants in the history of the nation.
Irish Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
100,000 1845-1850
95,000 Great Irish
90,000 Famine
85,000
80,000
75,000
70,000
65,000
60,000
55,000
50,000 1914-1918
45,000 World War I
40,000
35,000
30,000 1939-1945
25,000 World War II
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
397
Irish immigrants
The Irish immigrants were uneducated, Catholic, and considered uncul-

tured by the social elite in the United States. Many were unaccompanied
women, a fact that set the Irish apart from previous immigrant groups. The
young Irish girls took positions as domestic servants in the homes of the
wealthy. They worked to save enough to rescue more relations in Ireland
from starvation. These women and the unskilled Irish men who sought to
make a living digging ditches or building canals or bridges were scorned by
the nativists. However, from the lowest levels of society, these Irish Americans
began to build their version of the American Dream.
Religion The Irish Catholic poor, social by nature and custom and isolated
by their religious beliefs, built their own comfortable enclaves within the cit-
ies where they settled. Irish neighborhoods in New York City, Boston, Chi-
cago, and elsewhere developed into parishes. The Catholic parishes evolved
into social and educational centers within the communities. As the Irish de-
veloped a reputation for hard drinking and fighting, it was the parish priest
who often served as counselor and role model. The church cared for the im-
migrants’ spiritual, social, educational, medical, and emotional needs. As the
number of immigrants increased, parishes and religious orders built schools,
hospitals, and orphanages to meet the needs of the communities.
Politics and Social Reforms As the growing numbers of Irish immi-

grants began to frighten the white Anglo-Saxon Protestants already established
in the cities and to threaten the
status quo, the children of the
famine generation began to see
the possibilities that existed for
them by virtue of their numbers
and their ambition. Politics was a
natural extension of the parish
culture. Precinct by precinct, the
Irish began to embrace the U.S.
political system as a tool for per-
sonal advancement and a mecha-
nism for social change.
One individual who came up
from the streets of New York was
young Alfred E. “Al” Smith. Raised
on the streets of Brooklyn as the
Brooklyn Bridge was being built,
he took advantage of the political
patronage in Tammany Hall to
gain a foothold in politics. Under
the tutelage of Charles Murphy Alfred E. Smith (right) with future president Franklin D.
and Jimmy Walker, Smith rose up Roosevelt in 1930. (Franklin D. Roosevelt Library)
398
Irish immigrants
through the political ranks in New York and eventually became the governor
of New York State. Similar political machines evolved in Kansas City and Chi-
cago, as politicians sought to serve their constituencies. Smith initiated social
reforms, including child labor laws, and improved safety requirements to pro-
tect workers. Elsewhere in the nation, labor unions were gaining support.
With many successes to his credit in New York, Smith ran unsuccessfully for
president in 1928. Many people still distrusted the Irish, and the nativists and
many non-Catholics feared papal interference in U.S. politics should Smith
be elected. The first Irish Catholic to claim the office of the president of the
United States would be another descendant from Irish peasant stock, John F.
Kennedy, in 1960. Kennedy would stand as a symbol of the Irish American
Dream brought to fruition.
Appreciation of Traditions During the 1980’s and 1990’s, Irish Ameri-

cans no longer bore the stigma of most negative stereotypes. The Irish gener-
ally assimilated into U.S. society, often intermarrying with other ethnic
groups, yet there continued to be a lingering appreciation of Irish history
and traditions, with a renewed interested in traditional Irish music and dance
that became a part of American popular culture, transcending ethnic origins
and religious beliefs.
Kathleen Schongar
Further Reading
ington: Indiana University Press, 2001. Study of late twentieth century
Irish immigrants in America’s largest city, which remains the first stop for
many new immigrants.
Fallows, Marjorie. Irish Americans: Identity and Assimilation. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979. Introduction to Irish American history, cultural
experiences, and expectations. Religion, labor, politics, and family dynam-
ics are considered within the context of American life.
Golway, Terry. The Irish in America. Edited by Michael Coffey. New York: Dis-
ney Enterprises, 1997. Enlightened look at the development of Irish Amer-
icans, including personal essays by those who lived through the cultural as-
similation process during the late eighteenth century and the nineteenth
century.
immigrant groups including the Irish.
ner’s Sons, 1981. Comprehensive historical perspective on the struggles
and successes of Irish assimilation into American culture. Many photo-
graphs complement the text.
399
Irish immigrants and African Americans
McCaffrey, Lawrence J. The Irish Diaspora in America. Washington, D.C.: Catho-

lic University of America Press, 1984. Provides an overview of Irish immi-
gration and explores significant religious, political, and economic factors
in Ireland and in the United States that influenced ethnic relations among
American immigrant groups.
Paulson, Timothy J. Irish Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005. Broad
survey of Irish immigration written for younger readers.
1892; German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; Immigration and Nation-
ality Act of 1965; Irish immigrants and African Americans; Irish immigrants
and discrimination; Irish stereotypes; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
Irish immigrants and

African Americans
Immigration issues: African Americans; European immigrants; Irish immi-
grants
Significance: Conflict has existed between Irish Americans and African

Americans since the first great waves of Irish immigration during the
1840’s.
Before the Civil War of the 1860’s, Irish Catholics were confronted with harsh
discrimination by Anglo-Protestant Americans. When dangerous work needed
to be done, many employers opted to hire cheap Irish labor instead of using
slaves, preferring to risk the life of an Irishman over one of their slaves, the
latter being valuable property. Struggling to survive at the bottom of the eco-
nomic ladder, the Irish feared that if slaves were set free, they would face even
more competition for scarce jobs. Many also believed that they should focus
their energies on improving their own plight before expending any of their
resources helping African Americans. Irish Americans’ concern for their own
survival and their view of African Americans as competition worked to sour
relations between the two struggling groups.
During the Civil War, Irish Americans, who were loyal to the Union gener-
ally, had no interest in fighting a war to free the slaves. During the war, when
disproportionate numbers of poor Irish were drafted to serve in the Union
forces, riots broke out in cities throughout the North. On July 13, 1863, anti-
draft rioting broke out in New York City, lasting until July 15. Irish Americans,
who viewed the conflict as a rich man’s war fought by the poor, took out their
400
Irish immigrants and African Americans
anger at abolitionists and African Americans by burning, looting, and beating

any African Americans in their path. New York militia were called out to stop
the rioting.
After the Civil War, the economic struggle between African Americans and
Irish Americans continued. Irish Americans and other white immigrants took
jobs in the booming industrial sector, and African Americans found them-
selves once again relegated to southern fields. Many African Americans, see-
ing immigrants usurp jobs they felt rightly belonged to them, began to en-
gage in nativist rhetoric. Many African Americans vociferously supported the
anti-immigration legislation of the 1920’s.
As Irish Americans gained greater political and economic power in the
twentieth century, they continued to do so at the expense of African Ameri-
cans. Although literacy tests and other racist laws denied the majority of Afri-
can Americans the vote until the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Irish used
their access to the ballot to gain control of local political machines and city
halls. As they lost their brogues and became established in the mainstream of
white America, the Irish used their political influence to monopolize civil ser-
vice positions while excluding African Americans and new immigrants.
During the 1990’s, Irish Americans exceeded the national average in edu-
cation, income, and employment levels while African Americans consistently
lagged behind in all three areas. Although approximately one-third of Afri-
can Americans could be considered at least middle class, there were three
times more poor African Americans than white Americans.
Kathleen Odell Korgen
Further Reading
Foundation, 1999.
Reitz, Jeffrey G., ed. Host Societies and the Reception of Immigrants. La Jolla,
nia, San Diego, 2003.
ality Act of 1965; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants and discrimination; Irish
stereotypes; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
401
Irish immigrants and discrimination
Irish immigrants and

discrimination
Immigration issues: Discrimination; European immigrants; Irish immigrants
Significance: Discrimination against Irish immigrants to North America has

its roots in earlier British history and Protestant prejudice against Roman
Catholics.
In the British Isles, the English used notions of a “savage race” in colonialized
Ireland to justify systems that dominated and oppressed the Irish long before
the American colonies existed. These systems, which placed Irish Catholics
on the bottom of cultural hierarchies, became codified by religion. Labels
were given substance by combining religious identity with “race.” The English
also used immigrant groups of English and Scots for social control, according
to scholar Roy Forester, in Oxford Illustrated History of Ireland (1989). Succes-
sive generations of English who were born in Ireland identified themselves
as Irish Protestants rather than as English. Scottish people were brought to
northern Ireland to serve as buffer groups against Irish kingdoms. These
peoples—the Protestant Irish and Scotch-Irish—began identifying them-
selves as superior to the Irish Catholic “race.”
These hierarchies were transferred to North America along with the waves
of immigrants; however, cultural and “race” demarcations lost their sharp-
ness in the new land. The Scotch-Irish, as they had in Ireland, acted as buffers
in the American colonies until the American Revolution caused distinctions
to largely disappear within southern racial slavery hierarchies. Later immi-
gration by Irish Catholics, especially during the 1850’s potato famine, in the
end contributed more to the enlargement of the “white race” than to the cre-
ation of another ethnicity, according to Noel Ignatiev, in How the Irish Became
White (1995). In the nineteenth century, Irish Catholics faced heavy discrimi-
nation, and through this process, a notion of an Irish Catholic “race” devel-
oped among other Americans.
James V. Fenelon
Further Reading
ality Act of 1965; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants and African Americans;
Irish stereotypes; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
402
Irish stereotypes
Irish stereotypes
Definition: North American perceptions and misperceptions about Irish
immigrants

grants; Nativism and racism; Religion; Stereotypes
Significance: Among the millions of western Europeans who have immi-

grated to the United States, the Irish have been subjected to an excep-
tional amount of negative stereotyping and discrimination.
Between 1820 and 1920, approximately five million people emigrated from
Ireland to the United States. Most of these immigrants were Irish Catholic
farmers who were living in abject poverty in an Ireland dominated politically
and economically by England. Until the late nineteenth century, Irish Catho-
lics were not allowed to own farms in Ireland, and during the Potato Famine
of 1845-1850, more than five hundred thousand Irish farmers were evicted
from their farms. The only real choice for these displaced people was to leave
Ireland for the United States; however, they were not well received by white
Protestants, who then completely controlled the nation’s politics, business,
and society.
These Irish Catholic immigrants were viewed as a threat for several rea-
sons. Many first-generation Irish immigrants spoke only Gaelic, and they be-
came manual laborers who worked for low wages, creating competition for
jobs. The new immigrants built their own Catholic churches and schools and
made it very clear that they would not tolerate in the United States the reli-
gious discrimination that they and their ancestors had experienced in Ire-
land.
As early as the 1840’s, extremely offensive representations of Irish immi-
grants began to appear in American newspapers and magazines. The maga-
zine Harper’s Monthly published numerous drawings in which Irish Americans
were depicted as apelike creatures with whom normal Americans would not
want to associate. The same magazine printed in its April 6, 1867, issue a draw-
ing by Thomas Nast entitled “The Day We Celebrate.” Nast suggested that
Irish Americans celebrated St. Patrick’s Day by becoming drunk and then at-
tacking police officers. Such stereotypical images of Irish immigrants as vio-
lent drunkards appeared in numerous magazines throughout the last six
decades of the nineteenth century. Frequently, racist cartoons would simulta-
neously criticize Irish and Jewish immigrants. The fact that overt discrimina-
tion was directed against Jews and Irish Catholics at the same time may well
explain why Jewish American and Irish American immigrants came to realize
that they had a great deal in common.
Other cartoons ridiculed Irish Americans because of their religious be-
403
Irish stereotypes
Editorial cartoon from a late nineteenth century California newspaper expressing the fear that the
United States would be overwhelmed by foreign immigrants—particularly the Irish and Chinese im-
migrants caricatured in the cartoon. (Library of Congress)
liefs. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Bible was taught in many
American public schools, but the translation used was the King James version,
the official translation of Protestant churches. During the 1840’s, many Cath-
olic leaders asked school boards to allow Catholic pupils to receive religious
instruction based on the Douay translation, which was the approved Roman
Catholic version. Numerous contemporary cartoons during the 1840’s and
1850’s suggested that Catholics were opposed to the reading of the Bible;
however, nothing could be further from the truth.
Although disparaging representations of Irish Americans continued to be
published in U.S. magazines, most people came to realize that these stereo-
typical images distorted the truth and revealed more about the prejudices of
those creating the images than about Irish Americans whom they attempted
to ridicule.
Edmund J. Campion
404
Israeli immigrants
Further Reading
Irish immigrants and discrimination; Scotch-Irish immigrants.
Israeli immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the modern Middle
Eastern state of Israel
Immigration issues: Demographics; Jewish immigrants; Middle Eastern im-

migrants; Religion
Significance: Israelis are an ethnically and religiously diverse group, but the
term “Israeli Americans” is most often applied to Israeli Jews, both the Ash-
kenazim of central and eastern European heritage and the Sephardim of
Iberian, Middle Eastern, and North African origins. As Jews, their religious
observance ranges from a secular orientation to an orthodox one.
Constituting only about 1 percent of the U.S. immigrant population, Israeli

immigrants often perceive themselves to be sojourners, temporary residents
of the host country. They maintain social, cultural, and economic ties to their
country of origin, even while living abroad. Some retain dual citizenship.
With the aid of technology and the global economy, their lifestyles seem to fit
the new trend of transnationalism (allegiances and orientations that go be-
yond the boundaries of a single nation). Rather than forsake their homelands
and become completely assimilated, new immigrants actively participate in
both social worlds.
Rates of Immigration Israeli immigration rates vary depending on how

the term “Israeli” is defined and whether only legal immigrants are counted.
At the time of the 1990 U.S. Census, approximately 90,000 Israelis lived in the
United States. Most were settled in metropolitan areas, especially Los Angeles
and New York City’s Queens and Brooklyn boroughs.
Certain immigration trends are evident. First, the number of legal Israeli
immigrants entering the United States has gradually increased since 1948.
405
Israeli immigrants
For example, data from the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service in-
dicate that the numbers increased from about 1,000 to 2,000 per year be-
tween 1967 and 1976 and from 3,000 to 4,000 per year from 1976 to 1986.
During the 1990’s, an additional 39,397 immigrants came to the United
States from Israel, and they continued to come at a rate of more than 4,000
persons per year during the first three years of the twenty-first century.
Second, Israeli immigration was especially pronounced during the 1970’s,
especially after 1975, when, as 1990 census figures reveal, rates of Israelis trav-
eling to Los Angeles alone more than doubled from 8 percent (1970-1974) to
17 percent (1975-1979). Some have suggested the growth is due in part to in-
creases following war, in this case, the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Third, in re-
sponse to changing Israeli policy toward emigrants and economic conditions
in Israel, the number of Israelis returning to Israel has risen during the
1990’s. According to Israeli government estimates, the average yearly num-
ber rose from about 5,500 during 1985-1991 to nearly 10,500 during 1992-
1994.
Motives for Emigration In contrast to previous Jewish immigrants, con-

temporary Israelis are not “pushed” to emigrate to the United States because
of persecution or extreme economic hardship. Rather, the decision to emi-
grate is primarily motivated by “pull” factors. Many Israelis cite personal de-
velopment, particularly greater educational and economic opportunity, as
most important. They seek professional advancement, as well as a higher in-
come and standard of living. Others desire to reunite with family members al-
ready in the United States or leave to fulfill a personal need for adventure and
escape from the limited confines, both geographically and socially, of Israel.
Some engage in chain migration, being assisted by Israelis who have already
made the trip. Travel, especially among those completing required military
service, often leads to extended stays.
Certain features of Israeli society may be “push” factors: high inflation, bu-
reaucratic red tape, burdensome taxes, housing shortages, the difficulty in
developing capitalistic enterprises, and government regulations that intrude
into personal life. As part of a country prone to societal violence and war, Is-
raelis may mention the need to escape the siege mentality and the tensions
permeating society, as well as reserve army duty. Interethnic tensions moti-
vate some to flee from perceived discrimination waged by upper-class Ashke-
nazim against those of lower status.
Relations with the American Jewish Community Israelis were not ini-
tially welcomed with open arms by the American Jewish community. Rela-
tions between the two groups have been strained because of historical and
cultural factors. Historically, the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 real-
ized the Zionist dream of a Jewish homeland. To emigrate to Israel, or to
make Aliyah (“ascent”), was a firm demonstration of loyalty to the Zionist
cause. To immigrate from Israel and return to the Jewish diaspora, however,
406
Israeli immigrants
has pejoratively been referred to

Israeli Immigration
as Yerida (“descent”). Hence, Olim, to the United States,
“those who go up” to Israel, are 1949-2003
admired, in contrast to Yordim,
“those who go down,” who are dis- 5,000 1967
paraged for emigrating. Israeli Six-Days
4,500 War
Americans accept this stigmatized
identity, often expressing guilt and 4,000

shame for leaving. 1956
3,500 Suez
In classifying Israeli immigrants
as Yordim, American Jews were fol- 3,000 War
lowing the lead of Israelis. In 1976,
2,500
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin him-
self referred to Yordim as “the left- 2,000
overs of weaklings.” Israeli emi-
1,500
gration, coupled with rising Arab
birthrates, is perceived as a threat 1,000
1948
to the future of the Jewish home- Israeli
land. Israeli Americans, on the 500
independence
other hand, are often alienated 0
from American Jews, who, in their
1949-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
minds, have offered only mone-
tary contributions, rather than real
sacrifice, for Israel. American Jews
often condemn Yordim, yet many
would never consider emigrating Source: U.S . Census Bureau.
to Israel themselves.
Culturally, a gap exists between Israeli Americans and American Jews.
They eat distinct foods and have different lifestyles, political ideologies, and
entertainment preferences. Their language also differs; Israelis speak He-
brew as their primary language. Many Israeli Americans also follow the cul-
ture of their country of origin, be it Yemenite, Ethiopian, or Russian. An im-
proved relationship between Israeli Americans and American Jews has been
prompted by shifts in official Israeli policy toward Yordim enacted during the
mid-1980’s. In an effort to promote the return of Israeli Americans, the Is-
raeli government softened its position regarding emigration and offered en-
ticements such as employment, housing assistance, and travel loans. At the
same time, a number of American Jewish organizations initiated outreach pro-
grams for Israeli Americans. Previously, such organizations provided little, if
any, assistance in an effort to discourage Israelis from staying in America.
The Sojourner Mentality and Self-Identity Stemming from the neg-

ative stereotype of Yordim, Israeli Americans label themselves sojourners, in-
sisting, in the face of perhaps contrary evidence, that their stay in the United
States is temporary. Lower-status Israelis frequently become settlers, integrat-
407
Israeli immigrants
ing into the host country. Higher-status Israelis often become permanent so-
journers; they intend to return to Israel but have no serious plans to do so. As
permanent sojourners, they practiced what Natan Uriely, in a 1994 article in
International Sociology, has termed rhetorical ethnicity. Their identity is rooted
in their ethnicity, and they have a strong symbolic commitment to Israel. This
is evident in their repeated desires to go home. Israelis resist identifying
themselves as Americans or Israeli Americans, preferring an Israeli identity.
Many never fully assimilate.
Demographic Profile S. J. Gold and B. A. Phillips, in the American Jewish

Yearbook (1996), have provided a demographic profile of Israeli Americans.
According to their report (and at the time of their report), Israelis were
young, most under age forty-five, and more likely to be male, married, and
relatively well educated. They had high rates of employment and earned sub-
stantial income that was generally higher than that of the average foreign-
born person. Many were employed as managers, administrators, profession-
als, or technical specialists. Some were engaged in sales, and a significant
number (second only to Koreans in America) were self-employed in indus-
tries such as real estate, jewelry and diamonds, retail sales, and construction.
Women had less labor force participation in the United States than in Israel,
perhaps indicative of their rising social status in the United States.
Social Life in the United States Israelis tend to socialize with each
other, often in ethnic nightclubs, at communal singing sessions, or at ethnic
celebrations such as Israeli Independence Day. A few belong to ethnic organi-
zations such as Tzofim, an Israeli group similar to the Boy Scouts. Some form
ethnic subgroups based on their country of origin. Friends frequently substi-
tute for family and are invited to holiday observances or children’s bar/bat
mitzvahs. Many Israelis consider themselves to be secular Jews, linking reli-
gious observance with being Israeli rather than Jewish. However, many do
participate in religious activities in the United States, by joining synagogues
at a slightly higher rate than American Jews, providing their children with re-
ligious educations, and engaging in religious rituals to a greater extent in the
United States than in Israel. Some of the Sephardim have found the ortho-
dox Hasidic movement appealing. Perhaps this increased religiosity is a reac-
tion to the transition from being a religious majority in Israel to being a reli-
gious minority in the United States.
Rosann Bar
Further Reading Sources of information on Israel and emigration in-

clude H. Greenberg’s Israel: Social Problems (Tel Aviv: Dekel, 1979), D. Kass
and S. M. Lipset’s “Jewish Immigration to the United States from 1967 to the
Present: Israelis and Others,” in Understanding American Jewry, edited by Mar-
shall Sklare (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1982). Books and arti-
cles on the Israelis in the United States include D. Elizur’s “Israelis in the
408
Italian immigrants
U.S.: Motives, Attitudes, and Intentions,” in American Jewish Yearbook (1979);

James Feron’s “The Israelis of New York,” in The New York Times (January 16,
1977); S. J. Gold and B. A. Phillips’s “Israelis in the United States,” in American
Jewish Yearbook (1996); P. Ritterbrand’s “Israelis in New York,” Contemporary
Jewry (7, 1986); Moshe Shokeid’s Children of Circumstances: Israeli Immigrants in
New York (New York: Cornell University Press, 1988); Zvi Sobel’s Migrants from
the Promised Land (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1986); and Natan
Uriely’s “Rhetorical Ethnicity of Permanent Sojourners: The Case of Israeli
Immigrants in the Chicago Area,” in International Sociology (9, 1994).
migrants; Eastern European Jewish immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Jewish
settlement of New York; Jews and Arab Americans; Middle Eastern immigrant
families; Soviet Jewish immigrants; Twice migrants.
Italian immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Italy
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants
Significance: Italian Americans played an integral role in the development

of the United States. Although they have been subjected to ethnic stereo-
types—ranging from illiterate peasant organ grinder or shiftless vegetable
peddler to unskilled laborer or violent member of an organized crime fam-
ily—they have achieved distinguished success. Contributions from count-
less Italian Americans in entertainment, politics, and business have di-
rectly shaped and influenced the nation’s social landscape.
Italy sent few immigrants to the United States before the Civil War (1861-
1865). The 1850 census, the first to record ethnic group populations, listed
only 3,645 Italian Americans, and these individuals were primarily skilled arti-
sans, merchants, musicians, actors, and entrepreneurs. However, these num-
bers do not reflect their overall significance. Sponsored by Spain, England,
and France, Italian explorers helped chart the European pathway to the
Americas. After Christopher Columbus navigated the Atlantic in 1492, sev-
eral of his countrymen continued his pursuits. Giovanni Caboto, often re-
ferred to as John Cabot in popular history textbooks, obtained financial back-
ing from England’s King Henry VII and organized a successful expedition to
the New England coast in 1497. Amerigo Vespucci helped popularize interest
in America following the publication of two pamphlets highlighting the po-
tential rewards available to new settlers on the eastern seaboard. Giovanni da
409
Italian immigrants
Verrazano was the first Euro-

pean to enter New York Har-
bor during the early sixteenth
century.
Although numerous adven-
turers from other countries also
facilitated European migration
to America, the efforts of sev-
eral Italians were crucial for
the success of many early colo-
nial enterprises. Roman Cath-
olic missionaries helped carve
out the French Empire in the
Mississippi Valley. Artisans de-
veloped glassware and silk in-
dustries in Jamestown, Virginia.
Thomas Jefferson recruited
Italian masons to help con-
struct his home at Monticello
and enlisted the aid of several
musicians to form the U.S.
Marine Corps Band. Italians
also helped design and deco-
Flyer from an organization dedicated to protecting Ital- rate the interior of the early
ian immigrants from being exploited upon their arrival in White House, and Italian opera
America. (Center for Migration Studies) emerged as one of the most
popular forms of entertain-
ment among the upper classes in antebellum America. Although there were
few Italian Americans in the nation, they had made a significant cultural im-
pact.
The Great Wave From 1880 to 1920, more than four million Italians en-
tered the United States. Approximately 80 percent were men, and because 97
percent initially passed through New York City, the bulk of the Italian Ameri-
can community settled in major eastern cities such as Philadelphia, Boston,
and New York City; however, a large community also emerged in Chicago.
Following the unification of Italy during the 1860’s, southern Italians soon
began to feel alienated from and experienced widespread disillusionment
with northern leadership. Absentee landlords systematically exploited the
peasants, and agricultural policies produced massive hunger among share-
croppers and tenant farmers. Others succumbed to outbreaks of malaria.
Northern politicians enacted oppressive conscription laws forcing southern-
ers to serve seven-year terms in the military. As Italy quickly evolved into a
two-tiered system in which southerners were excluded from all facets of deci-
sion making, a large number of Italians voted with their feet and abandoned
410
Italian immigrants
their traditional attachment to their villages, emigrating to the United States.

Most Italians did not initially intend to remain in the United States. Estimates
vary, but between 30 percent and 50 percent returned to the homeland.
Strong familial ties and attachments to ancestral villages caused many to re-
turn despite the fact that few earned enough to reverse their impoverished
status.
The majority of Italian Americans became manual laborers. Ethnic labor
contractors, or padroni, persuaded many to emigrate from Italy by promising
them unlimited economic opportunities upon arrival in North America. The
padroni secured employment for émigrés and arranged the financing for the
transatlantic voyage. Italians helped build railroads and the New York City
subway system. Others toiled in dangerous and precarious conditions in fac-
tories; several became miners. Some were able to procure opportunities in
411
Italian immigrants
agricultural communities, but the majority of Italian Americans remained

locked in ethnic urban enclaves and were subjected to the outburst of nativist
xenophobic practices that accompanied the great wave of migration.
Assimilation and Nativism Racial and ethnic relations in the United

States have adhered to a complex hierarchical pecking order. Generally, each
wave of immigrants has encountered a number of discriminatory practices
designed to eradicate all remnants of ethnic identity. Because the dominant
culture reflected a solid Anglo-Saxon bias following the Civil War, new groups
from southeastern Europe were expected to embrace assimilationist policies
and Americanize. Reformers demonstrated little sympathy for immigrant cul-
ture and introduced a variety of measures to diminish and weaken traditional
ethnic ways.
Italian American children were extremely susceptible to Anglo-Saxon
assimilationists. They were forced into a form of cultural tug-of-war. Required
either to abandon their native culture or to face social ostracization and the
loss of economic opportunity, the second generation began to embrace
Anglo-Saxon culture. This caused considerable psychological problems. For
example, Italian American children were expected to find work and contrib-
ute to the household economy. This, however, resulted in a premature depar-
Confined to substandard tenement housing in major eastern cities and severely restricted in em-
ployment opportunities, many Italian immigrant families took garment work into their homes and
employed their children. The mother and her three eldest children in this picture earned a total of
about two dollars a week—when work was available—around 1913, while the father sought day
work on the street. (Library of Congress)
412
Italian immigrants
ture from school. If a child decided to stay in school and pursue a profession,
that child risked the wrath of his or her family. Because most Italian Ameri-
cans considered the family to be sacred, young Italian Americans faced a clas-
sic dilemma. As a result, rates of socioeconomic mobility were quite low
among the first few generations.
Other forms of nativism also surfaced. Public schools insisted that children
speak only English, and officials often shortened and Americanized Italian
family names. Some families experienced violence when they attempted to
move outside the ethnic enclave. Many people were subjected to racial re-
marks such as dago, wop, and guinea. Although studies have shown that the
rates of alcoholism and mental illness were lower compared with those of
other groups, the suicide rate among Italian Americans tripled during the
great wave of migration.
Perhaps the greatest example of nativist xenophobic pressure occurred
during the 1920’s during the trial of two Italian anarchists, Nicola Sacco and
Bartolomeo Vanzetti. Nativist sentiment, spurred by fears of communism,
had been growing in the United States when Sacco and Vanzetti were arrested
under questionable circumstances for murder and robbery in Massachusetts.
Both men were judged as violent revolutionaries and subversive ethnic agents
rather than on the merits of their case. Although their guilt remains debat-
able, both men were executed in 1927.
Organized Crime The average Italian American suffered from the nega-
tive impression created by a select minority of Italians who attempted to con-
struct vast empires in organized crime. As congressional committees cracked
down on criminals, some Americans concluded that all Italian Americans
were associated with a nationwide crime syndicate commonly referred to as
La Cosa Nostra or the Mafia. These rumors received considerable credibility
in 1963 when career criminal Joseph Valachi broke a code of silence and ex-
posed his associates. As a result, the nation became obsessed with the Mafia.
References to the Mafia in The New York Times increased from 2 in 1962 to 359
in 1969. Mario Puzo’s novel The Godfather (1969) was made into an Academy
Award-winning film, but his violent portrayal of Italian criminals negatively
affected many law-abiding Italian Americans. Other gangsters such as John
Gotti acquired national fame during the 1980’s, and once again Italian Amer-
icans were found guilty by association. Numerous popular authors flooded
the market with books detailing how murder was used to settle disputes be-
tween Italians. Despite the fact that only a select few were involved in criminal
activity, all Italian Americans were described as being sympathetic toward the
Mafia.
Famous Italians Not all Italian Americans were unskilled workers or com-
mon criminals. Many achieved considerable success in their fields. Joe Di-
Maggio established a major league baseball record for hitting in fifty-six con-
secutive games. Heavyweight boxer Rocky Marciano defeated several notable
413
Italian immigrants
champions, including Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, and Jersey Joe Wolcott, and
retired as an undefeated champion. Frank Capra emerged as one of the na-
tion’s finest filmmakers, and his 1946 film, It’s a Wonderful Life, is considered
one of the country’s classic movies. Singer Frank Sinatra, who was often un-
justly accused of being in the Mafia, entertained generations of Americans
with his swagger and ballads. Politician Fiorello La Guardia served as a con-
gressman, New York City mayor, and United Nations relief official. Poet and
publisher Lawrence Ferlinghetti provided much-needed support for and
helped solidify the Beat generation’s place in American literature. Geraldine
Ferraro was the first woman to become a vice presidential candidate in 1984.
Pop singer Madonna (Ciccone) evolved into a cultural icon during the 1980’s.
Countless others also achieved prominent status in American life, thus prov-
ing that despite being victimized by ethnic stereotyping, Italian Americans
have risen to the highest pinnacles of success in the United States.
Robert D. Ubriaco, Jr.
Further Reading
Burgan, Michael. Italian Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005. General
survey of Italian immigration to the United States; part of a series of books
on immigration written for younger readers.
Daniels, Roger. Coming to America. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Places the
Italian American experience in its proper comparative framework with
other ethnic groups.
immigrant groups, including Italians.
Mangione, Jerre, and Ben Morreale. La Storia: Five Centuries of the Italian Amer-
ican Experience. New York: HarperCollins, 1992. Comprehensive source on
the role of Italian Americans in the United States since the colonial era.
Mormino, Gary Ross. Immigrants on the Hill: Italian Americans in St. Louis, 1882-
1982. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1986. Examines why the Italian
immigrant community has been able to withstand the process of assimila-
tion that typically undermines the solidarity of ethnic urban enclaves.
Rolle, Andrew F. Westward the Immigrants: Italian Adventurers and Colonists in an
Expanding America. Ninot: University Press of Colorado, 1999. Study of the
role of Italian immigrants in America’s westward expansion.
Scholarly study of the role of Jewish and Italian immigrants in World War I.
414
Jamaican immigrants
Yans-McLaughlin, Virginia. Family and Community—Italian Immigrants in Buf-

falo, 1880-1930. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1971. Revealing study
of the early Italian immigrant ordeal in an eastern American city.

1943; Garment industry; Immigration Act of 1924; Little Italies; Sacco and
Vanzetti trial.
Jamaican immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the West Indian island
of Jamaica
Immigration issues: African Americans; Demographics; Slavery; West In-

dian immigrants
Significance: Jamaican immigrants come from a small, mostly black nation

with different patterns of race relations and have had to adjust their expec-
tations as they have dealt with native-born black and white Americans. As a
415
Jamaican immigrants
consequence, they have often had to struggle with an uncertain racial and
ethnic identity.
The movement of Jamaicans to the United States began during the early
twentieth century and increased greatly after the 1965 relaxation of immigra-
tion restrictions. Jamaican immigrants clustered in metropolitan areas along
the eastern seaboard and in California, where many attained success as lead-
ers in politics, religion, education, and business.
The Caribbean island of Jamaica was colonized by Spaniards in the six-
teenth century. After most of the Arawak Indians died, the Spanish brought
African slaves to work their sugar plantations. The British acquired Jamaica in
1670 and continued the practice of slavery. West Indian slavery did not en-
courage passivity, nor did it damage slaves’ self-confidence to the extent that
United States slavery did. Jamaican slavery ended in 1838, a generation be-
fore slavery’s demise in the southern United States. Jamaica gained national
independence in 1962.
Jamaican Immigration Centuries of slavery left the is-
to the United States, land with a majority black popu-
1953-2003 lation (many of whom were very
poor), a smaller mixed-race seg-
22,000 ment, and a small, prosperous
white population. Jamaica, unlike
20,000
the United States, never developed
18,000 Jim Crow laws, rigid color castes,
or a tradition of lynching. Race is
16,000 not a pressing issue in Jamaica,

where blacks occupy positions at
14,000
all levels of society. Jamaican im-
12,000 migrants to the United States, most
of whom are of African ancestry,
10,000 often experience shock upon en-
tering a society with a powerful
8,000
white majority and a long history
6,000 of blatant and rigid color preju-
dice and discrimination. They de-
4,000 velop various strategies to deal
1962
Jamaican with racism, such as confrontation,
2,000
independence resignation, and development of
0 heightened race consciousness.
1953-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Twentieth Century Immigra-

tion Immigration from Jamaica
to the United States occurred
throughout the twentieth century.
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. Many propertied and educated Ja-
416
Jamaican immigrants
maicans had established themselves in New York City by the 1920’s. Other
Jamaicans entered the country as temporary migrant farmworkers under spe-
cial visas. During the World War II labor shortage, Jamaicans were encour-
aged to work on farms and in factories in the United States. The 1952 Immi-
gration and Nationality Act reduced West Indian immigration; however
Jamaican immigration surged following passage of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act of 1965, which opened admission to nonwhite immigrants from
Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Jamaican newcomers settled mostly
in the metropolitan areas of New York City and Miami. By 1990, 435,024 Ja-
maicans lived in the United States, about 80 percent of whom were foreign-
born. The leading states of residence were New York, Florida, California, New
Jersey, and Connecticut, according to 1990 U.S. Census figures. During the
1990’s, Jamaican immigration averaged about 17,000 people per year, and
that figure dropped to about 14,000 immigrants per year during the first sev-
eral years of the twenty-first century.
Education, Business, and Leadership Jamaicans arriving in the first de-

cades of the twentieth century became black community leaders in the areas
of business, politics, and the arts. In New York City, many were business own-
ers and professionals. Some, such as Marcus Garvey, became government,
civil rights, or labor union leaders. Others, including Claude McKay, a promi-
nent writer who helped found the Harlem Renaissance of the 1920’s, became
cultural leaders.
The 1965 Immigration Act established a preference for skilled migrants.
Accordingly, Jamaican immigrants in the latter part of the twentieth century
tended to be well educated. The departure of many technical, managerial,
and professional workers badly needed for the island’s economic develop-
ment has produced a “brain drain” in Jamaica. The value Jamaican immi-
grants place on education is reflected in the school performance of Jamaican
American youth. Rubén Rumbaut’s 1992 survey found that the children of Ja-
maican immigrants tended to have high grade-point averages and to score
high on standardized reading and math tests. The children reported spend-
ing a large amount of time doing homework (versus watching television) and
had very high educational aspirations.
Comparisons with African Americans Economic motivation underlies

much Jamaican migration, and some transplanted islanders become business
owners. Social scientists vary in their interpretations of West Indian entrepre-
neurship. Some, such as Thomas Sowell and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, credit
West Indians with habits of thrift and hard work that cause them to be more
successful economically than U.S.-born African Americans. The implication
is that African Americans should not blame race discrimination for their pov-
erty. Others, including Reynolds Farley and Stephen Steinberg, argue that Ja-
maican immigrants constitute a select group, skilled and highly motivated be-
fore they leave the island.
417
Jamaican immigrants
Farley and Steinberg also argue that the differences in economic success
between immigrant and U.S.-born African Americans have been exagger-
ated. Farley cites statistics showing that while West Indians are more often
self-employed than U.S.-born African Americans, the self-employment rate
for whites is much larger than for either nonwhite group. Statistics for unem-
ployment and income also place Jamaican Americans well below whites. Most
Jamaican Americans are not self-employed. Many obtain advanced education
and become lawyers, doctors, and teachers; others work in construction.
Women have high labor force participation and many work in domestic ser-
vice and nursing.
Questions of Identity As Jamaican Americans attempt to arrive at a

sense of racial or ethnic identity, they encounter opposing forces. On one
hand, they tend to retain their ethnic identity, thinking of themselves as Ja-
maican Americans, because of the constant influx of new immigrants who re-
vitalize distinct cultural elements of folklore, food preferences, religion, and
speech. This separateness is enforced by the attitudes of African Americans,
who sometimes resent the islanders because of their foreignness, their entre-
preneurial success, and because some white employers apparently prefer
foreign-born workers. On the other hand, Jamaican Americans may adopt an
assimilated label, calling themselves black or African American, prompted by
daily experiences with racism. Because of the conflicting pressures of living in
the United States, second-generation islanders sometimes vacillate, at times
identifying with African Americans and other times attempting to distance
themselves from them.
Nancy Conn Terjesen
Further Reading
Farley, Reynolds, and Walter R. Allen. The Color Line and the Quality of Life in
America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1987. Includes a chapter on
the economic status of West Indians.
Heron, Melonie P. The Occupational Attainment of Caribbean Immigrants in the
United States, Canada, and England. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications,
2001. Economic study of West Indian immigrants.
Parrillo, Vincent. Strangers to These Shores. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon,
1997. General treatment of race and ethnic relations with sections on both
Jamaicans and Rastafarians.
of papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants that in-
cludes chapters on West Indians.
Vickerman, Milton. Crosscurrents: West Indian Immigrants and Race. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1999. Study of the West Indian immigrant experi-
ence that contains interviews with Jamaicans in New York City who tell of
contending forces of racism and equal treatment in the United States.
418
Jamestown colony
Waters, Mary C. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Re-
alities. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999. Examines the Ja-
maican immigrant experience in the United States.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Dominican immigrants; Haitian im-

migrants; Santería; Universal Negro Improvement Association; West Indian
immigrants.
Jamestown colony
The Event: Foundation of the earliest British settlement in North America
Place: Jamestown, Virginia
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Native Americans
Significance: The first successful British settlement in North America and

the beginning of the Virginia Colony, Jamestown has become a historical
symbol of British immigration to North America.
In the year 1605, England and Spain had finally made peace, and in England
capital was accumulating and commerce flourishing. Captain George Way-
mouth had returned from a voyage to Nantucket and Maine to explore a pos-
sible refuge for Roman Catholics. Five Abenaki Indians whom Waymouth had
brought with him and a glowing account of the expedition by Catholic
scholar James Rosier had attracted much attention.
Origins After their interest was aroused, Sir John Popham, Lord Chief Jus-
tice of England, and Sir Ferdinando Gorges, both powerful members of the
mercantile community, petitioned the Crown in the name of a group of ad-
venturers for a charter incorporating two companies, one based in London
and the other based in Plymouth. The patent issued on April 10, 1606,
granted them the territory known as Virginia, located between latitudes
34 degrees and 41 degrees north. The London Company was authorized to
settle between latitudes 34 degrees and 41 degrees north, and the Plymouth
Company, between latitudes 45 degrees and 38 degrees north, but neither
was to settle within one hundred miles of the other. Because of Sir Walter Ra-
leigh’s explorations in the Chesapeake Bay area and Waymouth’s investiga-
tions in Maine, the adventurers knew exactly what to request.
The absence, before 1618, of the official minutes of the Virginia Company,
as the two companies were jointly called, has forced historians to turn to frag-
mentary and often biased sources, including the sometimes conflicting ac-
419
Jamestown colony
counts of Captain John Smith in his memoirs and some settlers’ incomplete
journal entries. However, enough facts have been ascertained that a basic
chronology can be reconstructed.
On December 20, 1606, the Virginia Company of London dispatched for
America three ships, the Godspeed, the Discovery, and the Susan Constant, carry-
ing 144 men and boys. Captain Christopher Newport was to be in charge until
the expedition reached land. After making landfall on the southern shore of
Chesapeake Bay on April 26, 1607, and following a brief skirmish with local
members of the Powhatan Confederacy, the 105 survivors turned up the
Powhatan (renamed the James) River to search for a favorable site to settle.
On May 14, they disembarked on a peninsula extending from the north
shore, where they would begin to build James Fort, later called “James Towne.”
Although the area was low and marshy, it was beautiful, seemed defensible,
and provided anchorage for deepwater vessels. The great James River offered
the possibility of penetration into the interior for exploring and trading with
native communities.
Settlement Only after the settlers had landed and opened the sealed box
containing their instructions did they learn the names of their council, the
governing body that had been appointed by the Virginia Company. This
council would prove an inferior mode of governance: Its seven members
quickly disagreed with one another (there had been contention, for exam-
ple, over their settlement site), and a considerable number of the other set-
tlers were headstrong adventurers. This lack of concentrated authority in
Virginia resulted in bickering and the formation of factions. The strong if
near-dictatorial leadership of Smith, the second president of the council,
held the settlement together after fear and suspicion led to the ousting of the
council’s weaker first president, Edward Maria Wingfield.
More pressing than matters of government was the necessity of providing
for the settlers’ physical needs. Upon their arrival in America, they had di-
vided themselves into three groups: the first was to concentrate on construc-
tion and fortifications; the second was to plant crops and keep watch down-
river; and the third was to explore the surrounding area. Although the
company hoped to find a water route through the continent to the South
Sea and encouraged search for minerals, there was little time for such activ-
ity. Establishment of a settlement and development of trade were more ur-
gent.
Relations with Native Americans The accomplishment of both these

aims depended on the amicable relations with local native peoples, members
of the great Powhatan Confederacy of about thirty tribes. The Powhatans oc-
cupied most of Tidewater Virginia south of the Potomac River. The naïve set-
tlers, rather than meeting the simple-minded “lovable savages” touted by the
London promoters, soon realized that these people were both sophisticated
and highly wary of the English intrusion into their domain.
420
Jamestown colony
Late nineteenth century painting providing a romantic depiction of Pocahontas’s alleged rescue of
Captain John Smith. (Library of Congress)
James Towne (not yet even a half-moon bunker) lay in the middle of
Paspehege hunting grounds. On May 26 approximately two hundred Pow-
hatans attacked the infant settlement, killing one or two and wounding more
than a dozen—the first of many such skirmishes that would occur over the
next several years. In mid-June, the confederacy’s leader Wahunsonacock
(known as Powhatan) sent envoys from upriver to make peace and provide
food for the now-starving travelers. In the fall, Smith undertook a reconnais-
sance trip and was detained by Powhatan’s half brother Opechancanough,
who delivered Smith to Powhatan.
The famous story of Powhatan’s mercy at the behest of his young daughter
Pocahontas was Smith’s fabrication some two decades after this episode;
Powhatan more likely expected to bargain with the Europeans, knowing well
that he had the upper hand in being able to supply them with food and hop-
ing to strike a deal for weapons in return. Smith agreed but tricked the Indi-
ans who escorted him back to Jamestown into accepting trinkets in exchange
for valuable corn. It was also during this time that the Indians had their first
taste of aqua vitae, or 100-proof alcohol. Powhatan would continue to supply
food (at times by force), punctuated by minor attacks on the settlers, during
the settlement’s early years until, in 1622, after repeated abuse at the hands of
the English, he would mount a major uprising.
421
Jamestown colony
Rebuilding After returning to the settlement, Smith found disease, death,

and dissension. The settlers had made little headway in building the store-
house and adequate shelter, and although the river was full of sturgeon and
they knew that they must boil the water to make it potable, they were eating
barley soaked in slimy, brackish water and dying of influenza, typhoid, and
starvation. Although the strict discipline of Smith’s council presidency and
the addition of more immigrants improved conditions at the settlement, the
first two years must be judged as disappointing. Not only had the settlers
failed in the basics of healthy survival; they had also failed to return commer-
cially valuable resources to England.
The backers in London therefore embarked upon a more ambitious pro-
gram to be financed on a joint-stock basis. Having negotiated a new charter,
the Virginia Company, under the leadership of Sir Thomas Smythe, launched
a campaign for financial support. Sixteen hundred persons were to emigrate
to Virginia on two great expeditions in the summer of 1609. The joint-stock
arrangement would allow a pooling of labor with common stock, since each
person’s migration to America was counted as equal to one share of stock. By
this means a community of interest was developed between the adventurer in
England and the colonist. The new charter of 1609 abolished the royal coun-
cil and placed control in the hands of the council of the company. A governor
with absolute authority was to replace the local council in the colony.
The first great contingent of settlers set out on May 15, 1609, with Sir
George Somers in command. Ironically, the ship carrying the leaders was
blown away from the others in a hurricane and foundered in Bermuda, its
passengers not arriving in Jamestown until nearly a year after they had set out.
When the other ships arrived in Virginia, Smith refused to give up his post as
council president, though he yielded leadership after a famous accident
(some have speculated conspiracy) in which he was injured when his gunpow-
der pouch ignited and exploded.
The departure of Smith for England and the arrival of almost four hun-
dred new settlers in weakened condition placed considerable strain on the
economy of the colony. When the leaders of the expedition arrived the fol-
lowing summer, they found only sixty settlers still living, with the settlement
in ruins about them. Famine, disease, and attacks by Indians had left even the
few survivors on the brink of death or reduced to a subhuman existence that
sometimes involved cannibalism. Since the new arrivals were without suffi-
cient provisions, the settlers abandoned hope of maintaining the colony and
prepared to leave for England by way of Newfoundland.
As the disheartened colonists were sailing down the James River, miracu-
lously they met Thomas West (Lord De La Warr), their new governor, coming
upriver with a year’s provisions. Lord De La Warr ordered the colonists to re-
turn and reestablish the settlement. The new leadership, with additional sup-
plies and manpower, gave the colonists courage to continue.
In 1612, John Rolfe, who would eventually marry Pocahontas, discovered
Virginia’s “gold” when he planted the first West Indies tobacco in its soil.
422
Jamestown colony
Used initially for medicinal purposes, the new American commodity was soon
being smoked “for fun” by Europeans—an “aqua vitae” made of smoke.
Warren M. Billings
Christina J. Moose
Further Reading
Bridenbaugh, Carl. Jamestown, 1544-1699. New York: Oxford University Press,
1980. Brief history that emphasizes the “people—red, white, and black—
who lived on or near Jamestown Island.”
Hume, Ivor Noël. The Virginia Adventure: Roanoke to James Towne. New York: Al-
fred A. Knopf, 1994. Historical archaeologist Hume provides an extremely
detailed account of the settling of Virginia, comparing primary docu-
ments as well as physical evidence and deftly teasing out fact from legend.
Josephy, Alvin M., Jr. Five Hundred Nations: An Illustrated History of the North
American Indians. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994. Powhatan and Smith
are covered in chapter 4 of this lavishly illustrated history of North Amer-
ica from its original occupants’ viewpoint.
Morgan, Edmund S. American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial
Virginia. New York: W. W. Norton, 1975. Early chapters include an excel-
lent description of the difficulties faced by Smith and the other settlers.
tory. Washington Square, N.Y.: New York University Press, 2001. Brief sur-
vey of labor in Britain’s North American colonies.
Rountree, Helen C. Pocahontas’s People: The Powhatan Indians of Virginia Through
Four Centuries. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990. Written by an
ethnohistorian and anthropologist, this is one of the best studies of James-
town and the settlement’s relationship to the Powhatan Confederacy.
Vaughan, Alden T. American Genesis: Captain John Smith and the Founding of Vir-
ginia. Boston: Little, Brown, 1975. A short, balanced biography of Smith
combined with a detailed history of Virginia from Smith’s departure in
1609 until his death in 1631.
See also Anglo-conformity; British as dominant group; History of U.S. im-

migration; Jewish settlement of New York.
423
Japanese American Citizens League
Japanese American Citizens

League
Identification: Japanese American advocacy organization
Date: Founded on August 29, 1930
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization; Civil

rights and liberties; Japanese immigrants
Significance: The largest and most influential Japanese American political

organization, the Japanese American Citizens League promotes assimila-
tion as the most effective response to racism.
The Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) was founded in 1930 in

respose to widespread anti-Asian sentiment in the United States. The JACL
promoted assimilation and Americanization as the most effective way for the
nisei (second-generation Japanese Americans) to gain the approval of the
general public. Initially a loose federation of loyalty leagues, the JACL’s influ-
ence was minimal until 1941, when it cooperated with the federal govern-
ment in carrying out President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Executive Order
9066, which ordered the internment of Japanese Americans in restricted
camps during World War II. Because of that cooperation, it lost the respect of
many Japanese Americans. After World War II, the JACL achieved a positive
public profile as it lobbied for civil rights legislation. However, it has re-
mained controversial for its insistence on accommodation rather than con-
frontation in the political arena. Now the largest and most influential Japa-
nese American political organization, the JACL must deal with conflicts
within its own ranks regarding its basic goals.
Formation of the JACL The roots of the JACL can be traced to 1918 in
San Francisco, when Thomas Y. Yatabe and a small group of his college-
educated friends met to discuss the future of the nisei in America. Calling
themselves the American Loyalty League, they were well aware of the racism
blocking the economic progress of Asian immigrants and their families at
that time. The issei (first-generation Japanese Americans) hoped their chil-
dren, the nisei, would have opportunities for economic and social advance-
ment. However, as Ronald Takaki has documented in Strangers from a Different
Shore (1989), widespread discrimination made it difficult for them to find em-
ployment other than manual or menial labor. Yatabe and his friends were
among the fortunate few who had achieved professional success; a recent
dental school graduate, Yatabe drew into his circle another dentist, a doctor,
and an attorney. They realized that nisei in general still faced an uncertain fu-
ture. In their view, the best way to gain acceptance by the general public was
424
to define themselves first and foremost as loyal Americans dedicated to ad-

vancement of democratic ideals. Individual enterprise, fair play, and respect
for law and order were cornerstones of this philosophy.
In 1922, James “Jimmie” Yoshinori Sakamoto founded a similar group, the
Seattle Progressive Citizens League. In 1923, Yatabe established the Fresno
American Loyalty League, the first statewide league. In 1928, he and Saburo
Kido founded the San Francisco New American Citizens League. All of these
groups shared a commitment to being “100 percent American” in their out-
look. Realizing how much more effective they would be if they joined to-
gether, Clarence Takeya Arai, who was elected president of the Seattle group
in 1928, proposed a national meeting of delegates. He envisioned the forma-
tion of a national council of Japanese American citizens leagues which would
present a positive public profile. This four-day meeting, called to order by
Arai on August 29, 1930, in Seattle, Washington, became the founding con-
vention of the JACL: the first national political organization of Japanese
Americans.
The nisei leadership at the convention represented a special group of
college-educated professionals with economically secure, middle-class, urban
backgrounds. Mostly in their late twenties and early thirties, they were strik-
ingly unlike the majority of nisei in America at that time, who were younger
(with an average age of seventeen) and from rural, working-class back-
grounds. Moreover, they were distinctly different from the issei, who still held
political, economic, and social power in local Japanese American communi-
ties through the Japanese Associations, which provided legal aid and other
services for immigrants. The issei usually chose (or were forced by racism) to
remain within their own communities; their English skills often were mini-
mal, and their direct interactions with outsiders were limited. Through Japa-
nese Associations and other local organizations—such as prefectural associa-
tions, merchants’ and farmers’ mutual aid societies, vernacular newspapers,
and Japanese language schools—the issei maintained their communities as
best they could within the larger American society. The nisei leadership of
the JACL, however, insisted on a completely different approach to finding a
secure place for Japanese Americans in the United States. Above all, they
stressed assimilation, not ethnicity, underscoring their American aspirations
rather than their Japanese heritage.
Therefore, one of the first items of business at the founding convention
was to remove the hyphen in “Japanese-Americans,” on the basis that any Jap-
anese aspect of nisei identity had to be subordinated to their American des-
tiny. More than one hundred delegates from five states (Washington, Ore-
gon, California, Illinois, and New York) and the territory of Hawaii approved
resolutions asking that Congress address two timely issues: the constitutional-
ity of the 1922 Cable Act and the eligibility of issei World War I veterans for cit-
izenship. Suma Sugi became their lobbyist for amendment of the Cable Act,
which stripped citizenship from any American woman who married an “alien
ineligible to citizenship”; through Sugi’s efforts and those of the League of
425
Women Voters, Congress changed the law in 1931, so that citizenship could
not be revoked by marriage. Tokutaro “Tokie” Nishimura Slocum became
their lobbyist for veteran citizenship, which finally was secured by the Nye-Lea
Bill in 1935.
JACL’s Work During its first decade of existence, however, the JACL had
little direct effect on the Japanese American community. This situation
changed dramatically in 1941, when President Roosevelt issued Executive Or-
der 9066, authorizing the internment of Japanese Americans during World
War II. The federal government imprisoned virtually all issei leaders of busi-
nesses, schools, and churches on the West Coast. The JACL then took over, di-
recting Japanese Americans not to resist relocation. In fact, the JACL cooper-
ated with the War Relocation Authority (WRA) in identifying community
members who might be subversives. Dillon S. Myer, WRA director, worked
closely with Mike Masaoka, a JACL official, in administering the camps—a re-
lationship intensely resented by the majority of Japanese Americans. Attor-
ney Wayne Mortimer Collins, who stood against popular opinion to defend
Japanese American civil rights during and after World War II, went so far as to
blame the JACL for much of the suffering that internees endured.
The JACL succeeded in building a positive public profile after the war by
lobbying for civil rights legislation such as amendment of the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1952, thereby guaranteeing the right of all issei to natu-
ralized citizenship. To this day, however, it has remained a controversial orga-
nization, especially because of its conservative political stance. The JACL
must deal with interfactional conflicts between its “old guard” and younger
members who question its basic goals.
Mary Louise Buley-Meissner
Further Reading
Chan, Sucheng. Asian Americans: An Interpretive History. Boston: Twayne, 1991.
Carefully researched investigation of Asian American socioeconomic, po-
litical, educational, and cultural realities. Provides contexts for assessing
JACL achievements.
book. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-Clio, 2005. Useful reference work on Asian
American political activism.
Drinnon, Richard. Keeper of Concentration Camps: Dillon S. Myer and American
Racism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987. Painstakingly re-
searched revisionist history of Myer’s administration of the War Relocation
Authority, including his collaboration with Mike Masaoka and the JACL.
Hosokawa, Bill. JACL in Quest of Justice. New York: William Morrow, 1982. His-
tory book commissioned by the JACL to record its accomplishments.
Mainly covers the 1930’s and 1940’s, emphasizing the organization’s patri-
otic nature.
426
Japanese American internment
Ng, Wendy L. Japanese American Internment During World War II: A History and
Reference Guide. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002. Comprehensive
reference source on all aspects of the internment of Japanese people dur-
ing World War II.
Niiya, Brian, ed. Japanese American History: An A-to-Z Reference from 1868 to the
Present. New York: Japanese American National Museum and Facts On File,
1993. Invaluable resource including a narrative historical overview, a chro-
nology of Japanese American history, and dictionary entries for that his-
tory. Scholarly research accessible to a general audience.
New York: Penguin Books, 1989. Groundbreaking investigation of Asian
American contributions to U.S. socioeconomic and political development.
Provides contexts for assessing JACL achievements.
See also Alien land laws; Gentlemen’s Agreement; Japanese American in-
ternment; Japanese immigrants; Japanese segregation in California schools;
“Yellow peril” campaign.
Japanese American
internment
The Event: Forcible removal of Japanese and Japanese American residents
of Western states to isolated internment camps during World War II
Date: 1942-1945
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Civil rights and liberties; Discrimina-

tion; Families and marriage; Japanese immigrants
Significance: During World War II, the U.S. government’s war powers were
used to deny due process of the law for aliens and U.S. citizens of Japanese
ancestry, to the disapproval of the postwar generation.
Historically in the continental United States there were severe restrictions on

Japanese immigration and naturalization, and in 1941 there were only about
40,000 foreign-born Japanese people (issei) plus about 87,000 American-
born citizens (nisei). Many were tenant farmers who lived under West Coast
state and local restrictions on land ownership, housing, employment, and ed-
ucation; Japanese Americans were a semisegregated community.
427
Evacuation Following the December, 1941, Japanese attack on Pearl Har-

bor, the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrested 2,192 Japanese security
risks, followed by German and Italian counterparts. False reports of Japanese
American espionage at Pearl Harbor, Japanese victories in the Pacific, and ra-
dio and press rumors combined to create unfounded fears that traitors and
saboteurs might assist a Japanese invasion of the West Coast. On February 14,
1942, Lieutenant General John DeWitt, with War Department encourage-
ment, and misrepresenting rumors as security threats, recommended remov-
ing persons of the Japanese “enemy race,” including American citizens, from
his West Coast command area. The Justice Department acquiesced, and on
February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order
9066, authorizing the army to create restricted zones excluding “any or all
persons.” On March 21, 1942, Congressional Law 503 provided criminal pen-
alties for noncompliance.
Internment DeWitt put more than 100,000 West Coast Japanese Ameri-
cans under curfew, exclusion, removal, collection, and evacuation orders,
which resulted in permanent job and property losses. Their ten relocation
Japanese Americans reporting at the assembly center at Santa Anita race track in Arcadia, Califor-
nia, in April, 1942. Given less than two months to prepare for relocation after President Roosevelt
signed Executive Order 9066, tens of thousands of loyal American citizens, as well as recent immi-
grants, had to abandon their homes and businesses before entering the uncertainties of intern-
ment. (National Archives)
428
Internees eating a meal at the Manzanar Relocation Center in California’s eastern Sierras.
(NARA)
camps in the Western United States were isolated, barren, crowded, and
crude, with barbed-wire fences and armed guards. Liberals and conservatives
alike generally seemed to approve this mass imprisonment, conspicuously
limited to the Japanese race. Internees who hoped that compliance would
demonstrate their loyalty to the United States became demoralized by camp
conditions and popular hostility.
In 1943, Japanese American soldiers changed the situation. Aside from
their Pacific theater intelligence service, nisei already in uniform plus volun-
teers from the internment camps formed the 100th Infantry Battalion and
the 442d Regimental Combat Team. Their European combat and casualty
records earned public respect for the nisei soldiers and a more positive policy
for the internees. By early 1944, 15,000 nisei civilians were on restricted camp
leave; finally, on December 17, 1944, the West Coast exclusion order was
lifted.
Following Japan’s surrender on September 2, 1945, detention and exclu-
sion were phased out; the last camp closed March 20, 1946. The 1948 Evacua-
tion Claims Act offered meager compensations—about $340 per case—for
those renouncing all other claims against the government.
Court Cases Four significant wartime appeals by nisei reached the U.S.
Supreme Court. On June 21, 1943, in Hirabayashi v. United States and Yasui v.
429
United States, the Court upheld convictions for curfew violations, ruling the
curfews constitutional and the emergency real, and found that Japanese
Americans “may be a greater source of danger than those of a different ances-
try.” The Court held that winning the war must prevail over judicial review,
implicitly reversing Ex parte Milligan (1866). On December 18, 1944, the Court
granted habeas corpus in Ex parte Endo, ruling that Congress had not autho-
rized long-term detention for a “concededly loyal” American citizen; the
Court avoided broader questions of internment. On the same day, however,
in Korematsu v. United States, the Court upheld Korematsu’s conviction, on the
Hirabayashi precedent. Although three dissenting justices argued that the ex-
clusion order was part of a detention process, that Korematsu’s offense of be-
ing in his own home was not normally a criminal act, and that only his race
made it a crime under the exclusion orders, the Court majority upheld the
government’s wartime powers.
Redress America’s postwar generation developed different priorities. The

Civil Rights movement and Vietnam War protests emphasized racial justice
and deemphasized “national security.” In 1980 Congress established the Com-
mission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians to review facts
and recommend remedies. Their 1982 report, Personal Justice Denied, exposed
General DeWitt’s misrepresentations, finding that “not a single documented
act of espionage, sabotage or fifth column activity was committed by an Amer-
ican citizen of Japanese ancestry,” that Executive Order 9066 resulted from
“race prejudice, war hysteria and a failure of political leadership,” and that “a
grave injustice was done,” deserving compensation. Of the Supreme Court,
the report contended that “the decision in Korematsu lies overruled in the
court of history.”
The commission’s work enabled Yasui, Hirabayashi, and Korematsu to file
motions to vacate their convictions in the original courts on writ of coram
nobis, alleging prosecutorial misrepresentation and impropriety. Yasui died
while his case was in progress. On April 19, 1984, U.S. district court judge
Marilyn Patel granted Korematsu’s petition, acknowledging the 1944 Su-
preme Court decision as “the law of this case” but terming it an anachronism,
“now recognized as having very limited application.” On this precedent,
Hirabayashi’s convictions were overturned in 1987.
In 1988, a congressional act signed by President Ronald Reagan accepted
the findings of the 1980 commission, provided $1.2 billion in redress for
60,000 internees, and added, “for these fundamental violations of the basic
civil liberties and constitutional rights of these citizens of Japanese ancestry,
the Congress apologizes on behalf of the Nation.” The history of Japanese
American internment illustrates both the difficulty of limiting emergency
powers during a popular war and the abuses caused by failing to do so.
K. Fred Gillum
430
Japanese immigrants
Further Reading
Broek, Jacobus Ten, Edward Barnhart, and Floyd Matson. Prejudice, War, and
the Constitution. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968. Examina-
tion of the federal government’s decision to intern Japanese people from a
legal and constitutional perspective.
Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians. Personal Jus-
tice Denied. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982. Fed-
eral government report on the internment years.
Irons, Peter. Justice Delayed. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press,
1989. Study of the postwar legal struggle leading up to reparations during
the 1980’s.
Reference Guide. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002. Comprehensive
reference source on the internment years.
See also Alien land laws; Asian American literature; Asian American ste-
reotypes; Gentlemen’s Agreement; Japanese American Citizens League; Japa-
nese immigrants; Japanese Peruvians; Japanese segregation in California
schools; Little Tokyos; Model minorities; Ozawa v. United States; “Yellow peril”
campaign.
Japanese immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the East Asia nation of
Japan
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics; Japanese immigrants
Significance: Although people of Japanese descent have been one of the

most discriminated against groups in U.S. history, they have also become
some of the highest-achieving and most successful immigrant groups in
the United States.
During the 1890’s, a few of the Japanese who had moved to Hawaii during the
1880’s migrated to California, but large-scale Japanese immigration did not
take place until 1900. From 1900 to 1910, more than 100,000 Japanese moved
to the West Coast, first and primarily to California but eventually as far north
as Vancouver, British Columbia. By 1930, about 275,000 people living in the
United States were of Japanese origin or descent. By the end of the twentieth
century, this number had reached about 1.8 million.
Before World War II, Japanese immigrants were barred from becoming
U.S. citizens and owning land on the West Coast. During World War II, more
431
Japanese immigrants
than 100,000 Japanese Americans were placed in internment camps in the

Western United States and in Canada. However, the fighting spirit of the nisei
(second-generation Japanese American) army unit during World War II con-
tributed to a greater acceptance of Japanese Americans by other racial and
ethnic groups in the postwar period. By the end of the twentieth century, Jap-
anese Americans had received an official apology and reparations for the in-
ternment.
Early Reaction to Japanese Immigration In 1882, Congress passed the

Chinese Exclusion Act, primarily at the insistence of Californians who claimed
that the Chinese could not be assimilated into American culture. Many Cali-
fornians, therefore, were outraged when after Chinese immigration was vir-
tually stopped by the 1882 act, Japanese immigration began. These citizens
simply could see no difference between Chinese and Japanese immigrants, al-
though, in fact, the Japanese, who had been carefully screened by the Japa-
nese government, were generally better educated than the earlier Chinese
immigrants.
Soon after 1900, politicians and journalists agitated to stop Japanese immi-
gration, speaking of the “yellow peril.” They maintained that the Japanese
could not be assimilated into American culture and represented an outside
group that would attempt to control the United States. In 1905, the public
Japanese laborers undergoing health inspection at the Angel Island reception center in San Fran-
cisco Bay during the 1920’s. (National Archives)
432
Japanese immigrants
Japanese Immigration to the United States,

1861-2003
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000 1930’s
Rise of
10,000
Japanese
9,000 militarism
8,000
7,000 1941-1945
War with
6,000 United States
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
schools of San Francisco banned Japanese children from attending school

with white children, causing the Japanese government to become very angry.
The issue of San Francisco’s school segregation was resolved in 1907 when
President Theodore Roosevelt signed a Gentlemen’s Agreement with the Jap-
anese government, requiring that it not issue any more visas for workers to
come to the United States. The San Francisco school board then allowed Jap-
anese children to attend school with whites.
California and other states continued to harass Japanese immigrants. In
1913, California passed the Alien Land Law, which stipulated that Asians who
were ineligible for citizenship could not own land. This meant that the Japa-
nese immigrants, who were mostly agricultural workers, could work only as
tenant farmers and could not own the land on which they worked.
Miscegenation laws, making marriages between people of different races
illegal, were also enforced against the early Japanese immigrants, most of
whom were men. Unable to find wives in the United States, these men turned
to matchmakers in Japan. Often the immigrants would marry brides whom
they had seen, before the wedding, only in a photograph. White Californians
433
Japanese immigrants
Japanese immigrants awaiting a government health inspection off Angel Island in San Francisco
Bay in 1931. (National Archives)
were angered by the Japanese practice of marrying “picture brides.” They

pointed to this behavior as further evidence that the Japanese could not be as-
similated into American culture.
Japanese Americans During World War II By the start of World War II,
two generations of Japanese Americans (issei, or first-generation Japanese
Americans, and nisei, second-generation Japanese Americans) lived in the
United States and Canada. In 1942, members of the American and Canadian
governments felt that the Japanese Americans posed a threat to security.
Therefore, on February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Ex-
ecutive Order 9066, requiring people of Japanese origin or descent living in
the western part of the United States (California, Oregon, Washington, and
the southern part of Arizona) to be placed in internment camps; this order
affected more than 100,000 people. The Japanese Americans were given very
little time to gather their property or to take care of businesses before they
were interned. Property that actually belonged to nisei (who were American
citizens) was seized. Areas such as Japantown (Nihonmachi) in the Fillmore
district of San Francisco and Little Tokyo in Los Angeles became nearly de-
serted. What is more, within twenty-four hours of the bombing of Pearl Har-
bor, the United States government detained one thousand Japanese Ameri-
can community leaders and teachers.
434
Japanese immigrants
In Canada, the 1942 War Measures Act placed Japanese aliens and Japa-
nese Canadians in camps and required them to pay for their housing. Those
who objected to having to live in these camps were placed in prisoner-of-war
camps along with captured German soldiers in northern Ontario. In the
United States, various court cases were brought to challenge the govern-
ment’s treatment of Japanese Americans, but this treatment was deemed to
be legal in decisions such as Korematsu v. United States (1944) and Hirabayashi v.
United States (1943). In the decision handed down in Hirabayashi, the Court
suggested that because Japanese Americans had chosen to live together as a
group and had not assimilated well into the mainstream culture, the U.S. gov-
ernment was justified in being suspicious of them.
In January, 1945, Japanese aliens and Japanese Americans were allowed to
leave the camps. Unable to live in the Western United States, these people
and their families settled in the East. Soon after the United States released
the detainees from camps, the Canadians followed suit.
After World War II For a variety of reasons, life for Japanese Americans
improved after World War II. The bravery of the nisei soldiers during World
War II had impressed upon many other Americans how loyal Japanese Ameri-
cans actually were. Having seen firsthand the racial hatred practiced by the
Nazis, Americans and Canadians did not want this sort of prejudice practiced
in their home countries. Finally, much of the original prejudice and hatred
against the Japanese and Asians as a whole stemmed from white Americans’
fears of economic competition. The strength of the postwar U.S. economy
lessened these fears and created advancement possibilities for many racial
and ethnic groups.
In 1952, with the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act (also
known as the McCarran-Walter Act), it became possible for Japanese immi-
grants to become naturalized citizens. Although many Japanese citizens had
entered the United States as wives of U.S. servicemen under the 1945 War
Brides Act, many more entered under the 1952 act. From 1947 through 1975,
67,000 Japanese women entered as wives of U.S. servicemen, thus, becoming
Japanese Americans. These new Japanese Americans encountered a very dif-
ferent United States from the one experienced by earlier immigrants. After
1952, it was much less likely that Japanese Americans would isolate them-
selves in areas where only people of Japanese heritage lived. In 1956, Califor-
nia, by popular vote, largely through a campaign orchestrated by Japanese
American Sei Fujii, repealed its Alien Land Law, making it possible for people
born in Japan to own land in California.
The Mid- to Late Twentieth Century In the latter part of the twentieth
century, Americans became interested in all things Japanese. Japanese influ-
ences could be found in American music, fashion, architecture, philosophy,
and religion. Japanese Americans were able to lead the way in introducing
other ethnic and racial groups to Japanese culture and philosophy. During
435
Japanese immigrants
the 1960’s, recognizing that expressions of cultural heritage were becoming

popular, the Japanese Americans in the Fillmore district of San Francisco or-
ganized the first annual San Francisco Cherry Blossom Festival to share Japa-
nese philosophy and culture associated with the cherry blossom with other
Americans. Other cities such as Seattle, Washington, also organized cherry
blossom festivals. One of the better-known festivals is the National Cherry
Blossom Festival, held in Washington, D.C., each spring to celebrate the do-
nation of more than three thousand Japanese cherry trees to the American
people by the mayor of Tokyo in 1912.
Led by Japanese American citizens’ groups, Japanese Americans for many
decades attempted to obtain justice from the U.S. government for its treat-
ment of them during World War II. Finally, in 1988, Congress passed the Civil
Liberties Act. The American government acknowledged that an injustice had
been done, apologized for that injustice, and agreed to pay reparations of
twenty thousand dollars to each eligible Japanese American. In 1990, Presi-
dent George Bush began the reparations process.
Annita Marie Ward
Further Reading
Chalfen, Richard. Turning Leaves: The Photograph Collection of Two Japanese Fam-
ilies. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1991.
Hirobe, Izumi. Japanese Pride, American Prejudice: Modifying the Exclusion Clause
of the 1924 Immigration Act. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2001.
Hoobler, Dorothy, Thomas Hoobler, and George Takei. The Japanese American
Family Album. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Iida, Deborah. Middle Son. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books, 1996.
Kitano, Harry. The Japanese Americans. New York: Chelsea House, 1987.
Ng, Franklin, ed. Asian American Encyclopedia. 6 vols. New York: Marshall Cav-
endish, 1995.
Yanogisako, Sylvia Junko. Transforming the Past: Tradition and Kinship Among
Japanese Americans. Palo Alto, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1985.
See also Alien land laws; Asian American Legal Defense Fund; Asian
American literature; Asian American stereotypes; Gentlemen’s Agreement;
Japanese American Citizens League; Japanese American internment; Japa-
nese Peruvians; Japanese segregation in California schools; Little Tokyos;
Model minorities; Ozawa v. United States; “Yellow peril” campaign.
436
Japanese Peruvians
Japanese Peruvians
Identification: Japanese immigrants to the United States by way of Peru
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics; Japanese immi-
grants; Refugees
Significance: Victims of prejudice and distrust in both their Peruvian home-
land and the United States, a small number of Japanese Peruvians became
unwilling pawns in World War II rivalries.
In 1940, about thirty thousand people of Japanese descent lived in Peru. It
was a time when an already existing anti-Japanese movement was expanding,
and about 650 Japanese houses were targeted for assault in Lima. The follow-
ing year, after Japan brought World War II to the Americas, the Peruvian gov-
ernment seized the property of all Japanese immigrants.
An official at the U.S. embassy in Lima, John K. Emmerson, reported to the
U.S. State Department that the Japanese community in Peru was led by well-
organized nationalists who constituted a threat to U.S. national security. He
suggested that the leaders of the Japanese Peruvian community be brought to
the United States to be exchanged for American prisoners of war held in Ja-
pan. As a result, this proposal—as well as strong anti-Japanese sentiment from
the Peruvian government—caused more than seventeen hundred Japanese
Peruvians to be deported at gunpoint and transported to internment camps
in the United States between 1942 and 1945.
After World War II ended, the Japanese Peruvians who were detained in
the United States were not allowed to return to Peru or to have their belong-
ings returned to them by the Peruvian government. More than three decades
later, in 1988, the 112,000 Japanese Americans who were placed in internment
camps during the war received an official apology from the U.S. government
and $20,000 per person for being incarcerated. However, those Japanese Pe-
ruvians who were also interned were denied the apology and compensation.
This was because when they were deported from Peru, their passports were
taken away by the Peruvian government and they were considered technically
to be “illegal aliens” upon their arrival in the United States. Because they
were neither U.S. citizens nor permanent residents at that time, they failed to
qualify for the reparations even though a majority eventually became Ameri-
can citizens after the war.
Finally in June, 1998, American-interned Latin Americans received an offi-
cial apology from the U.S. government; however, their compensation was
only $5,000 per person. Moreover, they were allowed only two months to
make their applications for the payments. Ironically, by that time, Peruvian
attitudes toward the Japanese had changed so much that Peruvians had
elected a Japanese Peruvian, Albert Fujimori, the president of their country.
Nobuko Adachi
437
Japanese segregation in California schools
Further Reading
endish, 1995.
Reference Guide. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002.
See also Japanese American internment; Japanese immigrants; Japanese

segregation in California schools; Latinos; Twice migrants.
Japanese segregation in
California schools
The Event: Government-ordered segregation of Japanese students in San
Francisco’s public schools
Date: 1906
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Civil rights and liberties; Discrimina-

tion; Education; Japanese immigrants
Significance: San Francisco’s decision to segregate the small number of Jap-

anese students in its public schools provoked a major international dispute
between Japan and the United States that led to the so-called Gentlemen’s
Agreement of 1907, which limited Japanese immigration to the United
States.
On October 11, 1906, scarcely six months after Japan had magnanimously do-
nated more than $246,000 in aid (exceeding the combined donations of the
rest of the world) to help alleviate the suffering caused by the San Francisco
earthquake, the San Francisco Board of Education repaid Japan’s kindness by
voting to segregate Japanese children from “white” children in its public
schools.
The Japanese government was at first stunned by this blatant expression of
racial bigotry. The Japanese hoped that cooler and wiser heads would prevail
in California and that the order would be quickly rescinded. After waiting for
two weeks, Japanese prime minister Kinmochi Saionji instructed his ambassa-
dor, Shuzo Aoki, to deliver a note of protest into the hands of U.S. secretary of
state Elihu Root on October 25, in which the government of the United States
was reminded that Japanese citizens were guaranteed equal rights by treaty
and that the “equal right of education is one of the highest and most valuable
438
rights. . . .” Saionji went on to say that even if the “oriental schools” provided
for Asian children were to be equal to other schools, the segregation of Japa-
nese children “constitutes an act of discrimination carrying with it a stigma
and odium which it is impossible to overlook.”
The Japanese government cautioned its citizens against any anti-American
retribution in Japan and counseled the Japanese in San Francisco to bear the
insults and discrimination “with equanimity and dignity.” Japanese newspa-
pers, although outraged at this blatant racial insult, generally suggested that
the wisest course for Japan to take was to appeal to the American sense of
honor and fair play.
President Theodore Roosevelt was both embarrassed and outraged at the
San Francisco action and promised Aoki and the Japanese government that
the matter soon would be resolved. As was his wont, Roosevelt began a propa-
ganda campaign in the press to try to marshal national pressure against San
Francisco and to give the Japanese the impression that he was actively en-
gaged in resolving the issue. Much to his horror, several southern congress-
men sprang to the defense of their fellow racists in California. They inter-
preted the issue as being one of states’ rights and reminded Roosevelt that
the recent Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Supreme Court ruling allowed the individ-
ual states to maintain “separate but equal” public education facilities.
For its part, the San Francisco School Board failed to understand the ex-
tent and importance of the international crisis that it had caused. For nearly
thirty years Chinese people had been excluded as immigrants to the United
States and those Chinese who happened to be residents of California had
been denied virtually all political and civil rights as a matter of course. Native
American, African American, Mexican, Chinese, Korean, “Hindoo,” and
other children routinely had been segregated from “white” children. Why
now this sudden uproar?
Background to Bigotry The anti-Japanese bigotry was the result of a se-

ries of unfortunate coincidences. First, Japanese immigration to California
previously had been but a minor irritant compared to the problems posed by
the influx of Chinese laborers during the 1870’s and 1880’s. Fewer than ten
thousand Japanese had come to California before 1900, and perhaps only
half of them remained as residents. California labor contractors, however,
discovered the industrious Japanese laboring in Hawaiian cane fields after
the Hawaiian Revolution of 1894. Thousands were lured to California by these
contractors and found ready employment in the developing agricultural sec-
tor. As their numbers increased, so did their economic influence at nearly ev-
ery level. By 1905, organized labor in California had mounted a campaign
against Japanese immigration based on the fact that Japanese undercut
American workers by working longer hours for less money.
The 1906 earthquake had contributed to the general malaise and sense of
anomie in San Francisco in much the same irrational way that citizens of To-
kyo would turn against helpless innocent Koreans in the earthquake of 1923.
439
“White” San Franciscans who lost their homes in the earthquake quite irratio-
nally were outraged that a handful of Japanese had survived with their homes
and businesses intact. Even worse, a few enterprising Japanese set up thriving
cheap restaurants that catered to the workers involved in the urban recovery.
In the eyes of the bigots, then, the Japanese seemed to be prospering at the
expense of the suffering “whites.”
Third, the San Francisco Chronicle, perhaps in an attempt to out-sensationalize
William Randolph Hearst’s San Francisco Herald, chose that time to mount a
provocative campaign against Japanese immigration. It published unsubstan-
tiated and patently absurd charges that Japanese were spying on American
coastal defenses for Japan and that they were acquiring huge tracts of land in
the Central Valley, not only for its rich farmland but also for strategic military
purposes. Without question the worst fear that they dredged up was the hor-
ror of racial miscegenation. They claimed that hundreds, perhaps thousands,
of adult Japanese men were routinely placed side-by-side with young, inno-
cent “white maidens” in the city’s schools. Actually, some twenty-three Japa-
nese boys, none older than sixteen years of age, were dispersed throughout
the city schools, placed temporarily in lower grades until their English lan-
guage skills improved.
In response, during the late summer of 1906, a Japanese Exclusion League
blossomed, ironically led by four recent European immigrants to the city.
Pickets in front of Japanese restaurants handed out printed boxes of matches
that read, “White people, patronize your own race.” Gangs of thugs assaulted
lone Japanese in the streets and threw stones at the windows of Japanese resi-
dents. Petitions were circulated urging the exclusion of Japanese immigrants.
A final factor in the bigotry directed against the Japanese was the rabidly
racist campaign of the mayor of the city. Eugene Schmitz was facing an immi-
nent indictment for bribery and corruption by a reformist movement and
hoped to use the growing anti-Japanese hysteria to gain political support.
Schmitz joined the Japanese Exclusion League in a series of outdoor public
meetings. Before long, this unprincipled political opportunist had further in-
flamed the already irrational bigots. The result was that the school board
yielded to the demands of the rabble and voted to establish a separate school
for all “orientals,” including the Japanese. After a few months, the more re-
sponsible citizens of the city managed to bolster enough support to force an-
other vote in the school board, but not before many Japanese children were
denied the right to an education in their neighborhood schools and not be-
fore many Japanese adults were assaulted, threatened, and coerced to pay
“protection money” by the local police.
Efforts to Negotiate a Settlement Roosevelt met several times with

city and state leaders and reached a tacit agreement that the school segrega-
tion crisis could be resolved if some agreement could be reached to further
restrict the immigration of Japanese laborers. Ambassador Aoki was receptive
to Roosevelt’s invitation to discuss the issue but reminded him that Japan al-
440
ready restricted the number of passports granted to persons wishing to immi-

grate to the United States. He suggested that it would be better if the United
States would restrict immigration from Hawaii and Mexico, since apparently
most Japanese who came to California arrived from those countries. After
months of discussion, Roosevelt and the Japanese arrived at what has been
called the Gentlemen’s Agreement, which severely limited the number of
Japanese immigrants.
For the time being, ninety-three Japanese children returned to their
neighborhood schools and San Francisco and California settled down to
await nervously the next wave of xenophobic hysteria. However, they did not
have long to wait.
Impact of Event The effect of the San Francisco school segregation inci-
dent was most directly felt by the ninety-three children who had their educa-
tion interrupted for a year. To have required them to travel, in some cases,
across the whole city to the “oriental school” was at least inconvenient and in
some cases dangerous. The greatest impact was the denial of their human
and civil rights. To be singled out for discrimination on the basis of race was,
and always will be, a demeaning insult. The only thing that ameliorated and
stopped the discrimination was the fact that Japan, by 1906, had become a
powerful military world power. Japan could not be insulted with impunity.
However, the children of Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Mexican, Native Ameri-
can, African American, and other “nonwhite” origins did not have a strong
and proud nation to enforce their rights. Those unfortunate students were
forced to endure the insult and degradation of “separate but equal” schools.
The Japanese Exclusion League did not simply evaporate with the hysteria.
Like the irrational xenophobia that fed the crisis, the League continued on,
nurtured by the fear and hatred of ignorant and bigoted people. It was to sur-
face again in 1913, when the California legislature passed an Alien Land Act
which denied landowning to people (such as the Japanese) who could not be-
come citizens. It would flourish again in 1921 and 1924, when the U.S. Con-
gress passed immigration acts favoring immigrants from northern and west-
ern Europe and restricting the number of Japanese immigrants to less than
one hundred per year. One might argue that the racial bigotry evident in the
San Francisco school segregation crisis of 1906 was precisely the same viru-
lent strain of xenophobia that would sanction the incarceration of loyal
Americans of Japanese ancestry in 1942.
Curiously, within the so-called Gentlemen’s Agreement that resolved the
school segregation crisis was the basis for a somewhat different but perhaps
more dangerous problem. That agreement allowed for those Japanese al-
ready resident in the United States to bring their families to join them. The
citizens of California were startled to discover that Japanese residents in Cali-
fornia used this rule to bring their parents and sometimes women whom they
had married “by proxy” to live with them. The children born to Japanese in
the United States were natural-born citizens. The state of California could
441
deny the political and civil rights of aliens but could not do so to their citizen
children with the same impunity. Therefore, the Gentlemen’s Agreement was
but a puny bandage over the cancer of racial bigotry. It covered an unsightly
wound, but the problem continued to eat at the American body politic.
It can be argued also that the San Francisco school segregation crisis of
1906 helped to breed a resentment and self-fulfilling paranoia in Japan. Ja-
pan bitterly resented the insult perpetrated against its citizens. This anger
and resentment, along with the latent American suspicions bred by racial big-
otry, would contribute to much of the malice that would lead the two nations
into a senseless and horrible war a generation later.
Louis G. Perez
Further Reading
Bailey, Thomas A. Theodore Roosevelt and the Japanese-American Crisis: An Ac-
count of the International Complications Arising from the Race Problem on the
Pacific Coast. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1934. Solid but
somewhat dated. Integrates the crisis into the greater history of Japanese
American foreign relations. Places Roosevelt squarely in the imbroglio. In-
dexed, but the bibliography is dated.
Boddy, E. Manchester. Japanese in America. Los Angeles: E. M. Boddy, 1921. A
curious short monograph written to counter the arguments of the Japa-
nese Exclusion League. It examines and refutes each argument with Cali-
fornia and federal census and immigration statistics. Still valuable for its
glimpse of the visceral quality of the debate. No index or bibliography, but
contains a list (with addresses) of the California Japanese residents’ associ-
ations.
Daniels, Roger. The Politics of Prejudice: The Anti-Japanese Movement in California
and the Struggle for Japanese Exclusion. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1974. Masterful treatment of the politics of racial bigotry. Together
with Penrose, depicts the leaders of the “nativist” movement in California
with chilling clarity. Valuable bibliography of primary sources.
Gulick, Sidney L. The American-Japanese Problem: A Study of the Racial Relations of
the East and West. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1914. Despite being
dated, it is an interesting attempt by Christian ministers to refute the argu-
ments of the Japanese Exclusion League. Forms the basis of the work by
Boddy. Gulick had been a missionary to Asia.
Iriye, Akira. Pacific Estrangement: Japanese and American Expansion, 1897-1911.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972. A brilliantly written ex-
amination of the mutual animosities between two imperialist states. Mas-
terful incorporation of recent scholarship in both languages. Chapters 5
and 6, “Confrontation: The Japanese View” and “Confrontation: The Ameri-
can View,” are excellent. Source notation and bibliography in both Japa-
nese and English languages is impressive.
Neu, Charles E. An Uncertain Friendship: Theodore Roosevelt and Japan, 1906-
1909. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967. A solid revisionist
442
Jewish immigrants
interpretation. Uses Roosevelt’s extensive personal correspondence to

portray him as a shrewd politician whose own racial prejudices made him
more sympathetic to the Japanese Exclusion League bigots than to the Jap-
anese. Good use of primary documents.
Penrose, Eldon R. California Nativism: Organized Opposition to the Japanese,
1890-1913. San Francisco: R and E Research Associates, 1973. Despite an
annoying lack of organization, this is a surprisingly sophisticated examina-
tion of the exclusionist movement. Uses newspapers and correspondence
of the principal participants to examine the politics of the movement and
the background of its leaders. No index, but appendices include the vari-
ous anti-Asian exclusion acts.
Ruiz de Velasco, Jorge, and Michael Fix. Overlooked and Underserved: Immigrant
Students in U.S. Secondary Schools. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, 2000.
Broad study of the treatment of immigrants in American public schools.
See also Alien land laws; Asian American education; Asian American liter-
ature; Asian American stereotypes; Gentlemen’s Agreement; Japanese Ameri-
can Citizens League; Japanese American internment; Japanese immigrants;
Japanese Peruvians; Little Tokyos; Model minorities; Ozawa v. United States;
Jewish immigrants
Identification: Jewish immigrants to North America from Europe
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Demographics; European im-

migrants; Jewish immigrants; Middle Eastern immigrants; Religion
Significance: From their arrival in New Amsterdam in 1654, Jews were the
most important non-Christian group in an overwhelmingly Christian
America. Their experiences tested and helped define the meaning of reli-
gious freedom and the nature of ethnic relations in the United States.
In 1654, twenty-three Jewish refugees, who had fled Brazil when it was retaken
by the Portuguese from the Dutch, arrived in New Amsterdam seeking asy-
lum. They were not welcomed by Governor Peter Stuyvesant, who put them in
jail and requested permission from the Dutch West India Company to ban all
Jews from the colony. The company, which had several substantial Jewish
shareholders, refused, and Stuyvesant had to permit the newcomers to re-
main. Despite facing prejudice, the Jews were able to worship undisturbed.
The congregation grew slowly after the British conquered the colony in 1664
and renamed it New York. Other small Jewish settlements emerged in the
443
Jewish immigrants
port cities of Newport, Philadelphia, Charleston, and Savannah. Most new-

comers were descendants of Spanish and Portuguese Jews who used Sephar-
dic rituals in their synagogues and spoke a dialect of Spanish in their homes.
By 1776, the Jewish population in the British mainland colonies reached
between 1,500 and 2,500. The Jews were accepted by their neighbors and
could practice their religion unmolested, but they occasionally faced overt
prejudice and legal disabilities. Jews could be, but were not always, barred
from voting in colonial elections or holding political office because they were
unable to take required oaths as a Christian. Jewish merchants and crafts-
people participated fully in the commercial life of Newport, Rhode Island.
However, even after the London Parliament passed a naturalization act pro-
viding special oaths for Jews in the American colonies, Rhode Island courts
refused to naturalize Jews, claiming this would violate the purpose for which
the colony was founded.
The state and federal constitutions established after the American Revo-
lution shifted Jewish-Gentile relations from sometimes uneasy toleration
toward civil and political equality. The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights
provided federal protection for freedom of conscience, and the new state
constitutions began to remove test oaths and disestablish religion. The move-
ment was steady if uneven. Rhode Island did not grant Jews the right to vote
or hold office until 1842; North Carolina did not do so until 1868.
German Jews Until significant numbers of Jews from German-speaking ar-

eas of Europe arrived in the United States during the 1840’s, the Jewish popu-
lation remained small. In 1840, probably fewer than 15,000 Jews were in the
United States; when Jewish immigration from Slavic lands began to increase
in 1880, there were an estimated 250,000. Unlike their Sephardic predeces-
sors, these Jews used Ashkenazic rituals and many spoke Yiddish. The vast ma-
jority of migrants were young men and women reacting to economic and po-
litical changes that worsened the position of Jews in their home countries.
The German Jewish immigrants flourished in the New World and greatly
valued the political and economic freedoms they enjoyed in the United
States. As the nation expanded, the young men moved west, some beginning
as peddlers serving the scattered farmsteads, then opening mercantile estab-
lishments in the towns; a few very successful merchants established major de-
partment stores in the new cities. Their services were appreciated by their fel-
low townspeople; the first settlers in a town often became respected political
and social leaders. During the early years of this migration, a small, thinly
scattered Jewish population made finding Jewish marriage partners difficult,
and a significant percentage married Gentiles. As they became economically
successful, they founded families and brought young relatives to join them.
Increased population meant Jews could create their own communal organi-
zations, first a synagogue and a cemetery, then clubs that eased social iso-
lation, and also philanthropic organizations to care for the poor and the el-
derly. Often unable to observe the Sabbath as commanded by orthodox
444
Jewish immigrants
Jewish law, they were particularly receptive to the relaxed requirements of the
Reform movement, designed to modernize Judaism, that had already begun
in Germany.
During the nineteenth century, a number of anti-Semitic incidents oc-
curred in the United States. Civil War general Ulysses S. Grant issued an or-
der calling for the expulsion of all Jews from his army department on Decem-
ber 17, 1862, after hearing that some were trading with the enemy. President
Abraham Lincoln reversed the order shortly thereafter. When financially suc-
cessful German Jews began to arrive in resorts that had been the preserve of
the highest-ranking social groups of the United States, they experienced prej-
udice and discrimination. Famous resorts near New York such as Saratoga,
Newport, and Long Branch began to turn away Jews, even wealthy New York
City investment bankers. Lesser hotels began to use code words such as “re-
stricted clientele” or “discriminating families only” in their advertisements.
Eastern European Jews Between 1881 and 1924, approximately 2.5 mil-
lion Jews, about one-third of the Jewish population of eastern Europe, left
their homelands; nearly 2 million came to the United States. The moderniza-
tion of agriculture in eastern Europe had eliminated many of the petty mer-
chant and artisan occupations on which Jews depended. The major reason for
the timing and scale of the migration, however, was the impact of government-
sponsored anti-Semitism, especially the pogroms (anti-Jewish massacres) en-
couraged by the Russian government after the assassination of Czar Alexan-
Early twentieth century scene in a section of New York City that was so predominantly Jewish that it
was known as “Little Jerusalem.” (Library of Congress)
445
Jewish immigrants
der II in 1881. Unlike the German Jews who had preceded them, these Jews
concentrated in major cities, especially on the East Coast. Unlike other Euro-
pean groups of the period, few would return to their countries of origin.
Theirs was a migration of families, with an almost even sex ratio. Lacking fi-
nancial resources, they crowded into the poorest sections of the cities.
The German Jews did not welcome them. Class and cultural arrogance,
anxiety that they would be burdened by masses of poor, and fear that the
huge influx would exacerbate the already increasing anti-Semitism in the
United States led to negative reactions toward the newcomers. Only slowly
did the prosperous German Jews overcome their dislike and provide philan-
thropic support for those needing help. Not until the lynching of murder de-
fendant Leo Frank in Georgia in 1913, amid violent anti-Jewish attacks, did
they organize the Anti-Defamation League to combat anti-Semitism.
The reaction of the non-Jewish community was even more negative. Old-
line Yankees viewed the Jewish areas of cities as a foreign intrusion corrupt-
ing the fabric of American society. Psychologists, using intelligence tests to
rank ethnic groups, placed these Jews at the bottom, calling them genetically
defective and ineducable. Immigration restrictionists claimed the eastern Eu-
ropean Jews proved the need to close the United States to new immigrants.
Anti-Jewish Prejudice and Discrimination Dislike and fear of the

newly arriving Jews helped spur the drive to restrict immigration, which took
the form of legislation in 1924. It also provoked an outburst of overt preju-
dice and discrimination in the years from 1920 to 1940. As the children of the
massive eastern European Jewish immigration began to enter colleges and
professional schools, they faced direct discrimination. Columbia College es-
tablished quotas limiting admission of Jewish candidates, and other presti-
gious colleges and medical schools followed its example during the 1920’s.
Economic opportunities narrowed as few manufacturing companies, corpo-
rate law firms, major banks and insurance companies, or government bureau-
cracies such as the State Department were willing to employ Jews. Restrictive
covenants, which barred homeowners from selling their houses to Jewish
Americans or members of other “undesirable” groups, proliferated.
In 1922, Henry Ford began to publish a seven-year-long series of anti-
Jewish articles in his newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, propagating older
European stereotypes of Jews as both international bankers conspiring to
control the country and communist conspirators determined to undermine
capitalism. During the 1930’s, the rise of Adolf Hitler inspired right-wing ora-
tors to preach ideological anti-Semitism. They defended Hitler, blaming Jews
for the Great Depression and the international crises in Europe. More than
one hundred anti-Semitic organizations appeared across the nation. In New
York City, the Christian Front held street-corner rallies that often ended in
fistfights between adherents of the movement and Jewish passersby.
The reluctance to respond effectively to the plight of German Jews during
the 1930’s reflected the impact of prejudice against Jews. No agency enforced
446
Jewish immigrants
Milestones in Jewish Immigration History

Year Event
1654 Arrival of twenty-three Jews, the first in North America, in New
Amsterdam
1820-1880 Major years of German Jewish immigration
1880-1924 Major years of Eastern European Jewish immigration
1881-1883 Anti-Jewish pogroms in Russia after the assassination of
Alexander II
1892 Foundation of American Jewish Historical Society
1906 American Jewish Committee founded to aid Jews abroad
1913 Leo Frank is lynched; raises fears of persecution in Jewish
community
1913 Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith founded to combat
prejudice
1922 Henry Ford begins publishing anti-Semitic propaganda in his
newspaper
1924 Restrictive immigration law passes, ending large-scale immigration
1933 Adolf Hitler elected chancellor of Germany
1939 United Jewish Appeal organized to coordinate relief for Hitler’s
victims
1939-1945 Holocaust kills about six million Jews
1948 Israel proclaims independence
1984 Anti-Semitic slurs made during Jesse Jackson’s presidential
campaign worry Jews
1991 Conflict erupts between Jews and blacks in Crown Heights in
Brooklyn
immigration restriction rules more rigidly than the United States consular
service in Germany, which insisted on absolute proof of the ability of prospec-
tive immigrants to be self-supporting. As a result, despite the desperate need
of German Jews to escape, between 1933 to 1940 some 30 percent of the visas
available for Germans were never issued.
Post-World War II American revulsion at the sight of photographs of

Hitler’s death camps changed attitudes toward Jews. Overt anti-Semitism was
no longer acceptable, and relations of Jews with other ethnic groups eased.
447
Jewish immigrants
When the courts refused to enforce restrictive covenants, the movement of

Jews out of cities and into suburbs increased. Restrictions on college entry
and job opportunities began to disappear. New York City home offices of ma-
jor insurance companies, embarrassed by the revelation that they did not em-
ploy any Jewish stenographers in a city with a huge Jewish population, has-
tened to change their practices. The founding of the state of Israel and its
survival under attack increased Jewish pride and improved American percep-
tions of Jews; they now appeared a normal ethnic group, not greatly different
in its support of Old World nationalism from American Poles or Irish Ameri-
cans.
Although pre-World War II anti-Semitism had surfaced predominantly
among members of the Right, during the radical upheaval of the 1960’s, Jews
began to experience overt expressions of prejudice from members of the
Left. Support of Israel when it was attacked by its Arab neighbors was a rally-
ing point for all branches of the Jewish community. To Jewish ears, advocacy
of Palestinian rights by radicals too often sounded like attacks on Jews, rather
than simply criticisms of Israeli policy.
Even more disturbing was the open expression of anti-Jewish prejudices by
African Americans. The long-term alliance of the two groups in the fight for
civil rights seemed a thing of the past. Verbal attacks by Louis Farrakhan and
his Nation of Islam followers and the slur against New York Jews uttered by
Jesse Jackson in his 1984 presidential campaign were particularly worrisome
because African Americans seemed the only major group believing it accept-
able to express such prejudices publicly. Verbal and physical violence against
Jewish shopkeepers in Harlem and the riots in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights
neighborhood intensified the feelings of antagonism between African Ameri-
cans and Jews.
Greater acceptance by other Americans helped raise the rate of out-
marriage by Jews to more than 30 percent, which, combined with a birthrate
that dropped below replacement level, led to fears that the American Jewish
population would decline and ultimately disappear. Others were more opti-
mistic, believing that many of the children of outmarriages would remain
Jews. Immigration from Israel and the Soviet Union increased the Jewish
community. Estimates in 1996 indicated that the Jewish population was stable
at almost 6 million people who made up just more than 2 percent of the total
American population.
Milton Berman
Further Reading
Agosin, Marjorie. Uncertain Travelers: Conversations with Jewish Women Immi-
grants to America. Edited by Mary G. Berg. Hanover, N.H.: University Press
of New England, 1999. Fascinating collection of firsthand stories related by
Jewish immigrants.
448
Jewish settlement of New York
ica, 1984. Scholarly study of the reaction of this group to legal equality and
citizenship.
nois Press, 1986. Collection of thirteen scholarly articles exploring Ameri-
can attitudes toward Jews.
immigrant groups, including eastern European Jews.
Howe, Irving. World of Our Fathers. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
1976. Well-written description of the life of eastern European Jews in New
York City.
Lohuis, Elisabeth ten. Towards a Winning of the West: Novels by East European Jew-
ish Immigrants to America and Their American Offspring. [Leiden: s.n., 2003].
Insightful examination of the literature of immigrant Jews.
Marcus, Jacob R. The Colonial American Jew, 1492-1776. 3 vols. Detroit, Mich.:
Wayne State University Press, 1970. Definitive study of Jewish immigrants
during America’s long colonial era.
Sola Pool, David de, and Tamara de Sola Pool. An Old Faith in the New World:
Portrait of Shearith Israel, 1654-1954. New York: Columbia University Press,
1955. Describes the experience of the Sephardic Jewish community through
the history of the oldest synagogue in the United States.
Scholarly study of the role of immigrants in American fighting forces dur-
ing World War I.
migrants; Eastern European Jewish immigrants; Israeli immigrants; Jewish
settlement of New York; Jews and Arab Americans; Sephardic Jews; Soviet Jew-
ish immigrants.
Jewish settlement of
New York
The Event: Settlement of the first Jewish immigrants in North America
Date: August-September, 1654
Place: Manhattan Island
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Refugees;

Religion
449
Significance: The right of Jewish immigrants to live and work in New

Netherland, despite intense opposition, laid the groundwork for greater
religious toleration.
The first Jewish settlers of record in New Amsterdam were Jacob Barsimon
and Solomon Pieterson, both of whom came from Holland in the summer of
1654. The next month, twenty-three other Jews arrived, both old and young,
refugees from the Portuguese conquest of Dutch Brazil (New Holland), which
had been the richest property of the Dutch West India Company in America.
After leaving Recife, Brazil, their ship had been captured by Spanish pirates,
from whom they were saved by a French privateer, the St. Charles, captained by
Jacques de La Motthe. Having little more than the clothes on their backs, the
Jewish migrants convinced La Motthe to carry them to New Amsterdam for
twenty-five hundred guilders, which they hoped to borrow in that Dutch port.
They shortly discovered, however, what Barsimon and Pieterson were already
learning: There was much opposition to Jews settling in New Netherland.
Their poverty made the Dutch Jews from Brazil especially vulnerable. Un-
able to borrow the money, they asked La Motthe for extra time to contact
friends and receive money from Amsterdam. Rather than waiting, La Motthe
brought suit in the City Court of New Amsterdam, which ordered that their
meager belongings should be sold at public auction. Even after all that was
Modern depiction of Dutch colonial governor Peter Stuyvesant (with wooden leg) at the time of the
British occupation of New Amsterdam in 1664. (Library of Congress)
450
worth selling had been sold, the unfortunate exiles still owed almost five hun-
dred guilders. The City Court then ordered that two of the Jews—David Israel
and Moses Ambroisius—should be held under civil arrest until the total debt
was paid. In October, the matter finally was resolved after the crew of the St.
Charles, holding title to the remainder of the Jewish debt, agreed to wait until
additional funds could be sent from Amsterdam.
The ordeal of the Jewish refugees was far from over. They wanted to remain
in New Amsterdam, Director General Peter Stuyvesant complained to the
Amsterdam Chamber of the Dutch West India Company. Stuyvesant was
against their staying, as were the city magistrates, who resented “their custom-
ary usury and deceitful trading with the Christians,” and the deacons of the
Reformed Church, who feared that in “their present indigence they might be-
come a charge in the coming winter.” Indicating that the colonists generally
shared his anti-Semitic views, Stuyvesant informed the Amsterdam directors
that “we have for the benefit of this weak and newly developing place and the
land in general, deemed it useful to require them in a friendly way to depart.”
As for the future, he urged
that the deceitful race—such hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of
Christ—be not allowed further to infect and trouble this new colony, to the de-
traction of your Worships and the dissatisfaction of your Worships’ most affec-
tionate subjects.
Despite his vehemence against the Jews, Stuyvesant delayed his expulsion
order, waiting instead for guidance from the Amsterdam Chamber of the
Dutch West India Company, to whom the unwanted refugees were also ap-
pealing. The Jewish community in Amsterdam took up their cause. During
the early sixteenth century, the embattled United Provinces—and especially
the city of Amsterdam—had become a haven for persecuted European Jews,
whose many contributions to Dutch economic and cultural life had brought
them considerable religious freedom, political and legal rights, and eco-
nomic privileges. Not only did Jewish investors own approximately 4 percent
of the Dutch West India Company’s stock, but also, more than six hundred
Dutch Jews had participated in colonizing Dutch Brazil. Virtually all of them
left Pernambuco in 1654 with other Dutch nationals, losing practically every-
thing, although the conquering Portuguese had urged them to remain and
promised to protect their property. Their loyalty to the Dutch republic could
hardly be questioned. Moreover, thinly populated New Netherland desper-
ately needed settlers.
On the other hand, Dominie Johannes Megapolensis, one of the leading
Dutch Reformed preachers in New Netherland, was especially disturbed be-
cause a few additional Jewish families recently had migrated from Amster-
dam. He called upon the Amsterdam Classis of the Reformed Church to use
its influence to have the Jews expelled from the American colony. “These peo-
ple have no other God than the Mammon of unrighteousness,” warned
451
Megapolensis, “and no other aim than to get possession of Christian prop-

erty, and to overcome all other merchants by drawing all trade toward them-
selves.” Surely, Megapolensis pleaded, these “godless rascals” should be ex-
pelled.
Expressing some sympathy for Stuyvesant’s anti-Jewish prejudice, the Am-
sterdam Chamber nevertheless announced in early 1655 that Jews could
travel, trade, and live in New Netherland, provided they cared for their own
poor. Over the next few years, while not directly defying the company’s direc-
tive, Stuyvesant and other civil officials delayed, obstructed, and otherwise
made life more difficult for the Jews of New Amsterdam. In March, 1655, for
example, Abraham de Lucena was arrested for selling goods on Sunday. In
July, de Lucena and others petitioned to purchase land for a Jewish cemetery,
but were denied. Indeed, Jews were not allowed to purchase land in New Am-
sterdam. They also were exempted from the city militia, on grounds that
other colonists would not serve with them, but were required to pay a heavy
tax each month in lieu of service.
The Jews of New Amsterdam resented and resisted such treatment. In No-
vember, when Asser Levy and Jacob Barsimon, two young Jews with little
money, protested the tax and asked to do service with the militia instead, the
town council dismissed their protest and noted that the petitioners could
choose to go elsewhere. The same message was conveyed by the heavy rates
imposed upon Jews in the general levy to raise funds for rebuilding the city’s
defense wall. Most discouraging were the restrictions placed on Jews who
wished to trade to Albany and Delaware Bay.
In 1656, the Amsterdam Chamber chastised Stuyvesant and insisted that
Jews in New Netherland were to have the same rights and privileges as Jews in
old Amsterdam. They could trade wholesale, rent and buy property, and en-
joy the protection of the law as other Dutch citizens did. However, their reli-
gious freedom did not extend to public worship, and they were not allowed to
sell retail, work as mechanics, or live and work outside a designated area of
town. Despite the opposition of the Burgomasters and Schepens, Stuyvesant,
ever the faithful servant of the Dutch West India Company, insisted that Levy
be admitted to the burgher right, which allowed him to run a business, vote in
town elections, and even hold office. New Amsterdam Jews were not ghetto-
ized, and they could work as mechanics and tradesmen as well as shopkeepers
and merchants. Levy became the first Jewish landowner and was one of two
Jews licensed as butchers in 1660.
Prejudice remained, but social and economic acceptance came to the Jew-
ish community in New Amsterdam. They were allowed their separate burial
ground, and their right to observe the Sabbath on Saturday was respected.
They never established a synagogue and may not have had enough people to
maintain a congregation, but regular religious services apparently were held.
Levy owned a Torah, and others had prayer books and shawls. Most of the
Jews in New Amsterdam were Sephardim, descended from Portuguese Jews,
although a few were Ashkenazim Jews from Germany, France, and eastern Eu-
452
rope. Their numbers remained quite small, never more than a handful of
families, and there seems to have been a good deal of migration in and out.
However, the Jews of New Amsterdam were pioneers who prepared the way
for the more extensive Jewish community that would emerge in early New
York.
Ronald W. Howard
Further Reading
Hershkowitz, Leo. “Judaism.” In The Encyclopedia of the North American Colonies,
edited by Jacob Ernest Cook. Vol. 3. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1993. Brief but incisive summary of colonial Judaism.
Kessler, Henry H., and Eugene Rachlis. Peter Stuyvesant and His New York.
New York: Random House, 1959. Gives insight into the anti-Semitism of
Dutch Calvinism and the cooperative efforts of Stuyvesant and the Dutch
Reformed preachers against the Jews.
Wayne State University Press, 1970. Presents a detailed survey of the Jewish
experience in early America, relating connections between the various
Jewish communities.
Oppenheim, Samuel. The Early History of the Jews in New York, 1654-1664. New
York: American Jewish Historical Society, 1909. Basic source for details on
early Jewish settlers and their trials, tribulations, and successes.
Rink, Oliver A. Holland on the Hudson: An Economic and Social History of Dutch
New York. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1986. An account that re-
lates the Jewish migration to larger economic and social developments in
New Netherland.
Smith, George L. Religion and Trade in New Netherland: Dutch Origins and Ameri-
can Development. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1973. An analysis of
religious toleration that emerged in the northern Netherlands and its
transference to New Netherland.
migrants; Eastern European Jewish immigrants; Israeli immigrants; James-
town colony; Jewish immigrants; Jews and Arab Americans; Sephardic Jews;
Soviet Jewish immigrants.
453
Jews and Arab Americans

grants; Middle Eastern immigrants; Religion; Stereotypes
Significance: Jewish Americans and Arab Americans conflict in their views

of Israel, Palestinians, and the Middle East. Although some members of
both groups take inflexible stances in their opposition to each other, other
members are trying to bridge the gaps between the cultures.
Some scholars estimate that as many as three million Arabs and Arab Ameri-
cans live in the United States, a significantly larger number than the 1.2 mil-
lion Arab Americans counted in the 2000 U.S. Census. An accurate count is
difficult to obtain because many Arab Americans are reluctant to reveal their
origin for fear of discrimination or even violence from those Americans who,
perhaps influenced by negative press coverage of Arabs and events in the
Middle East, stereotype Arab Americans as terrorists or as anti-American.
U.S. government figures in 1994 place the number of Jewish Americans at
6 million—4 million religious and 2 million secular Jews. However, because
some Jews, like Arab Americans, are reluctant to reveal their religious and
ethnic identity for fear of discrimination, their actual numbers must be as-
sumed to be greater. Of the 6 million American Jews, about 250,000 are
Sephardic Jews. Of those Sephardic Jews, about 85,000 are Arab Jews, that is,
Jews from Arab nations. Arab Jews in the United States are largely from Syria,
Egypt, Yemen, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Morocco. If Arab Jewish Amer-
icans are included in the Arab American population, the total number of
Arab Americans is significantly increased. The largest population of Arab
Jews in the United States is in Brooklyn, New York. This community of Syrian
Jews is stable and affluent.
Origins and Demographics Arab Americans and Jewish Americans come

from very diverse backgrounds and subcultures that sometimes seriously con-
flict. However, they are very much alike in terms of being better educated and
more affluent than the average American.
Arab Americans trace their origins to the twenty-one countries of the Arab
League (established on March 22, 1945): Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt,
Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pales-
tine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emir-
ates, and Yemen. The earliest Arab immigrants, who arrived between 1900
and World War II, were predominantly Christians from Syria and Lebanon.
Most had little formal education and were predominantly illiterate. Their
success in running small family businesses, mostly in poor neighborhoods,
made it possible for their children to become well educated and enter the
454
professions or obtain high-level, white-collar jobs. Following World War II

and especially after 1965, when quota restrictions were lifted, Arab immigra-
tion increased significantly. These newer immigrants were more affluent, bet-
ter educated, largely Muslim professionals and businesspeople.
Arab Americans, affluent and well educated, are one of the most successful
ethnic groups in the United States. About half of all Arab Americans live in
large metropolitan areas, and around 20 percent in three urban areas: De-
troit, Michigan, New York, and Los Angeles-Long Beach. Detroit has the larg-
est Arab American population, which is divided roughly equally between
Christians and Muslims. The 1990 U.S. Census obtained the national origins
of Arab Americans in the state of Michigan. Of the 77,070 people reporting
Arab ancestry, 39,673 had Lebanese roots, 7,656 Syrian, 6,668 Iraqi, 2,695 Pal-
estinian, 1,785 Egyptian, 1,441 Jordanian, 14,842 unspecified Arab or Arabic,
and 2,310 other Arab. The census also counted 14,724 persons of Assyrian
(Chaldean) ancestry. Assyrians were not included with other Arabs because
most members of this group do not consider themselves Arabs.
Jews have been in North America for almost four hundred years. The earli-
est immigrants were Sephardic Jews in the seventeenth century in New York.
The nineteenth century saw the arrival of Ashkenazic Jews from Germany
and the surrounding areas. They often worked as merchants and soon be-
came prosperous. During the late nineteenth century, eastern European Jews,
many of them lacking resources, migrated in great numbers to the United
States, often settling in cities. These late arrivals faced prejudice from both
non-Jewish Americans and the earlier German Jews. After World War II and
the Holocaust, anti-Semitism diminished greatly, and all Jewish groups found
greater acceptance in the United States. Most Jews came to the United States
from Europe to escape religious persecution and poverty and, like Arab
Americans, have prospered in their adopted country. Both groups are pre-
dominantly urban dwellers.
Arab and Jewish American Relations Ironically, the conflicts in the

Middle East have brought Arab Americans and Jewish Americans closer. Most
of the efforts to improve intergroup relations have centered on events not in
the United States but in the Middle East, where Israel and many members of
the Arab League have been at war or in conflict since the establishment of the
Arab League in 1945 and of the state of Israel in 1948.
The Arab Americans and Jewish Americans most opposed to a just and eq-
uitable settlement of the plight of the Palestinians have been the religiously
orthodox and fundamentalistic members of the two groups. Those most will-
ing to talk about peace and justice have been the more liberal Jews (Reform
and secular Jews) and progressive Arabs. Most of the initiatives toward bring-
ing Arabs and Jews together have generally originated with Jewish Americans
and been supported enthusiastically by Arab Americans. A big impediment to
improving Arab-Jewish relations has been the conservative and orthodox
newspapers published exclusively for Arabs and Jews. Their biases and preju-
455
Cities with the Largest

Arab and Jewish Populations
Arab Americans Jewish Americans
1. Detroit, Mich. (metropolitan area) 1. New York (metropolitan area)
2. New York (metropolitan area) 2. Los Angeles, Calif.
3. Los Angeles, Calif. 3. Miami, Fla.
4. Washington, D.C. 4. Philadelphia, Pa.
5. Chicago, Ill. 5. Chicago, Ill.
6. Boston, Mass. 6. Boston, Mass.
7. Anaheim-Santa Ana, Calif. 7. San Francisco, Calif.
8. Bergen-Passaic, N.J. 8. Washington, D.C.
9. Houston, Texas 9. W. Palm Beach-Boca Raton, Fla.
10. Cleveland, Ohio 10. Baltimore, Md.
Sources: Samia El-Badry, “The Arab-American Market,” American Demographics, Vol.16, January, 1994,
pages 22-30; David Singer, ed., American Jewish Year Book, 1997. New York: American Jewish
Committee, 1997.
dices—and sometimes blatant hatred— often stand in the way of improving

intergroup relations. The politics of the Middle East and their effect on
American Arabs and Jews have been the focus of social-action organizations
in both communities.
Organizations Working for Togetherness On the national level, few

organizations have been as active and effective in bringing Arabs and Jews to-
gether as the New Jewish Agenda (NJA). Founded during the late 1970’s, at
its height it had twenty-eight chapters, most of which were in the large urban
areas where Jewish Americans and Arab Americans live and work. NJA was
started by Jews who felt that conservatives had dominated Jewish life in the
United States and who yearned to create a strong progressive voice in the
Jewish community. One of its major goals has been to have ongoing Jewish-
Arab dialogues on crucial matters of mutual concern to Jews and Arabs in
the United States and the Middle East, especially resolution of the Israeli-
Palestinian question. Los Angeles, which has one of the largest concentra-
tions of Jews and Arabs in the United States, has a dialogue group organized
much like an NJA group. However, the Los Angeles group concentrates on
Arab-Jewish issues and does not discuss issues such as racism, anti-Semitism,
and nuclear disarmament, which are covered by NJA groups.
American Arab and Jewish Friends (AAJF) was founded in 1981 by George
Bashara (an Arab American) and Arnold Michlin (a Jewish American) in
metropolitan Detroit. It is a program of the Greater Detroit Interfaith Round
Table of the National Conference for Community and Justice (formerly
known as the National Conference of Christians and Jews). The AAJF’s pur-
pose is to improve mutual understanding and friendship between the Arab
456
and Jewish communities by coming together informally through luncheons,

dinners, forums, and its sponsorship of an annual essay scholarship contest
for graduating seniors in area high schools. The essays, which describe inno-
vative and meaningful approaches toward the realization of the AAJF goal,
are the joint effort of two students, one Jewish and one Arab American.
In large cities such as Washington, D.C., where there are sizable Arab
American and Jewish American populations, the two groups often meet at
friendly gatherings held by organizations such as the Washington Area Jews
for Israeli-Palestinian Peace-Friendship. For several decades, this organiza-
tion has regularly held dinners where Arabs and Jews can become friends, dis-
cuss the issues that divide them, and make efforts to influence policymakers
who may be in a position to initiate positive changes in the bitter conflicts that
separate Israelis and Palestinians.
The Seeds of Peace summer camp was started by former newspaper editor
John Wallach during the early 1990’s. The Otisfield, Maine, camp brings to-
gether more than 160 teenagers from the Middle East—Palestinian Arabs
and Jewish Israelis as well as American Jewish and Arab youngsters—for a
month of good, healthy fun as well as serious discussions. Participants are se-
lected by their governments after writing essays on making peace. To run the
camp costs about $1.2 million per year, which Wallach receives in private do-
nations. All the campers come on scholarships, each worth around $2,000.
The camp has been so successful that other such camps are being organized
elsewhere in the United States.
The Middle East Friendship League was established by Professor Robert
Frumkin and his colleagues at Kent State University in Kent, Ohio, following
the killing of Israeli wrestlers by Arabs at the Olympic Games in Munich, Ger-
many, in 1972. Kent State had a large number of students and faculty from
Arab League nations and Israel as well as a sizable number of American Arab
and Jewish students and faculty, making it an ideal setting for an experiment
in improving Arab and Jewish relations. Although the main purpose of the or-
ganization was to promote friendships between Arabs and Jews, its members
discussed Middle East issues and engaged in social activism aimed at enhanc-
ing the peace process and addressing issues such as Palestinian rights and ter-
rorism. The league met monthly for several years, during which real friend-
ships developed and remained strong even after it disbanded.
Right-Wing Organizations No discussion of Arab-Jewish relations in the

United States is complete without a mention of the Jewish Defense League
(JDL) and Jewish Defense Organization (JDO), two right-wing organizations
that are the antithesis of all the previously discussed organizations. The JDL
and the JDO are pathologically anti-Arab. The JDL, founded by the late Meir
Kahane, was not only involved in defamation of Arab Americans but also the
destruction of Arab American property and even murder, including the Arab
American leader Alex Odeh. Although, according to the Encyclopedia of Associ-
ations (published by Gale Research), the JDL is no longer functioning in the
457
Justice and immigration
United States, its sister organization, the JDO, is. The JDO has almost four
thousand members in ten states. Like the JDL, the JDO states that it will de-
fend Jews by any means necessary and advocates the use of violence. Al-
though the JDL frequently took credit for violent and destructive acts against
Arab Americans and their property, the JDO, thus far, has not.
R. M. Frumkin
Further Reading
Ashabranner, Brent. An Ancient Heritage: The Arab-American Minority. New
York: HarperCollins, 1991. Well-balanced book that deals fairly with Amer-
ican Arab and Jewish relations.
Identity in the United States. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004. Study
of the special problems faced by Arab and other Muslim Americans in the
aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that turned many
Americans against Arab immigrants.
Levy, Mordecai. By Any Means Necessary. New York: Jewish Defense Organiza-
tion, 1998. Publication of the Jewish Defense Organization that provides
insights into the organization’s philosophy.
McCarus, Ernest, ed. The Development of Arab-American Identity. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1994. Excellent anthology that covers every
important aspect of the Arab American experience.
Murphy, Caryle. “There’s Mideast Peace in the Wilds of Maine.” Washington
Post, August 16, 1997. Discussion of the Seeds of Peace program.
Stroberg, Gerald S. American Jews. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974. Study
of Jewish Americans’ struggle with identity issues.
See also American Jewish Committee; Arab American intergroup rela-

tions; Arab immigrants; Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants; Eastern
European Jewish immigrants; Israeli immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Jewish
settlement of New York; Middle Eastern immigrant families; Muslims; Se-
phardic Jews; Soviet Jewish immigrants.

Definition: Issues of fairness, legality, and justice relating to immigration
Immigration issues: Border control; Illegal immigration; Laws and treaties;

Mexican immigrants
Significance: Immigration constitutes a major source of population growth

in the United States; it affects national and regional economic health, eth-
458
nic and cultural diversity, utilization of governmental services, and other

domestic conditions and raises many issues that pose questions of justice
and fair play.
For much of the twentieth century, the United States has absorbed more legal
immigrants than the other countries of the world combined. In addition to
legal immigration, each year several hundred thousand persons enter the
country to reside illegally. During the 1990’s, about one in four foreigners set-
tling in the United States did so in violation of immigration laws. Immigration
affects American society in fundamental ways, but the costs, benefits, and
moral obligations surrounding immigration are matters of dispute. The de-
bate over immigration is fraught with conflicting statistics and conflicting val-
ues and centers on three primary topics: humanitarianism, economics, and
nationhood.
Humanitarianism A large part of the rationale for accepting immigrants

into the United States stems from humanitarian concerns. In theory, U.S.
policies seek to assist people of other nations who experience political op-
pression, discrimination, famine, civil war, or any number of other tribula-
tions. In this context, allowing individuals to try to escape the worst of their
problems by immigrating to the United States can be seen as a form of inter-
national aid.
The United States, like most Western democratic countries, offers asylum
to refugees of political repression. The United States distinguishes between
political refugees fleeing persecution and economic refugees seeking a bet-
ter standard of living. The system, however, is subject to inefficiency and abuse.
Ascertaining whether a person is a political or economic refugee is a difficult
and time-consuming task. Typically, there is a large backlog of asylum cases
awaiting official action, and while the government is processing a case, the ap-
plicant may become “lost” within the general population. Such cases consti-
tute one source of illegal immigration. Government efforts to locate and re-
patriate these illegal refugees are often ineffective. Moreover, many such
enforcement actions raise justice issues of their own. Some groups in the
United States have dedicated themselves to shielding illegal immigrants from
immigration authorities and laws. Such efforts reached a peak during the
1980’s, when a number of churches and even cities declared themselves
“sanctuaries” for aliens who did not have official refugee status.
American public sentiment for political refugees has fluctuated widely over
time. The anticommunist and anti-Soviet feelings prevalent during the Cold
War made dissidents and defectors from Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union
especially welcome. Unusually brutal governmental crackdowns, such as those
by the Chinese government at Tiananmen Square in 1989, raise public sym-
pathy for political refugees, particularly for activists fighting for democracy.
Poignant examples of human tragedy, such as ethnic cleansing in Bosnia
and the warehousing of orphans in postcommunist Romania, can spur Amer-
459
icans to adopt foreign children and to sponsor the immigration of adults and
families. Some international crises, such as the fall of South Vietnam during
the mid-1970’s, dramatically increase the number of political refugees com-
ing to the United States. These large waves of refugees can fatigue American
public support for immigration. Further, incidents of international terrorism
inflicted upon Americans can reduce public acceptance of foreign immi-
grants (particularly when they belong to groups associated with terrorism,
rightly or wrongly, in the public consciousness).
Economics Persons without any claim of experiencing political repression

can also apply to immigrate to the United States. Many are motivated by eco-
nomic and societal opportunities. Traditionally, immigration of this sort has
contributed significantly to the growth of the U.S. population and economy.
A rapid influx of immigrants, however, may overwhelm the country’s ability
to assimilate them, burdening social services and housing stocks, absorbing
employment opportunities, and heightening racial and ethnic tensions. The
net economic effects of the presence of immigrants is a matter of debate. Pro-
ponents claim that immigrants tend to pay more in taxes than they receive in
social services, that they perform jobs American citizens prefer not to take,
and that they tend to have a strong work ethic. Yet to the extent that immi-
grants have lower levels of education and lower wage demands—both are par-
ticularly true of illegal immigrants—their presence may skew the economy to-
ward more service-oriented, labor-intensive jobs. The presence of a surplus of
cheap labor may reduce incentives to invest in greater mechanization. Some
critics charge that large numbers of immigrants make finding employment
more difficult for poor Americans, particularly for poor members of minority
groups.
To regulate those effects, the federal government controls immigration
through eligibility requirements and numerical limits. Deciding who will and
will not be permitted to immigrate raises obvious justice issues. Until the mid-
1960’s, government established immigration quotas on the basis of national-
ity, at times excluding some national and racial groups entirely. Since the
mid-1960’s, permission to immigrate to the United States has been awarded
largely by lottery.
Persons who are unable to secure legal resident status may resort to illegal
means for entering the country. In response, the U.S. government has taken
steps to block illegal border crossings. In 1924, the U.S. Border Patrol was
established to police the country’s borders. The Mexican border is more
heavily policed than the Canadian and has been fortified with surveillance
devices and metal fencing. These measures have led some critics to identify
the U.S.-Mexico border with the infamous Berlin Wall, although others argue
that the imprisonment of people within a country and the exclusion of peo-
ple from a country concern different questions of morality.
U.S. efforts to limit immigration involve economic and market forces in a
number of ways. The perceived promise of economic opportunity in the
460
United States, coupled with immigration restrictions, has given rise to human
smuggling operations, particularly in Mexico. During the early 1990’s, about
half the aliens illegally entering the United States were assisted in some way
by smugglers. In addition to taking police measures, the U.S. government has
tried to stem illegal immigration by reducing the incentives for it.
The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was touted in
part for its projected role in improving economic opportunities in Mexico,
thus reducing the incentive to emigrate. At the same time, governmental ben-
efits to illegal aliens were restricted, partly in the hope that such limitations
will make the prospect of living illegally in the United States less attractive.
Federal welfare payments, food stamps, unemployment compensation, and
other federal benefits are available to legal, but not to illegal, immigrants;
however, primary education and medical services cannot be withheld from il-
legal aliens. In ruling on such issues, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that
the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not depend
on citizenship status.
The Border States Border states have been especially sensitive to the
economic and social costs of illegal immigration. These states often bear the
brunt of service provision, infrastructure maintenance, law enforcement,
and other social costs of illegal immigration. In 1994, California voters passed
Proposition 187, a referendum that sought to deny state benefits, including
health care, welfare, and education, to illegal aliens. (The referendum was
immediately challenged as unconstitutional.) Some states have sued the fed-
eral government for the costs of supporting illegal aliens, asserting that the
federal government was negligent in not stopping such aliens at the country’s
borders. Border states have also challenged federal census figures, arguing
that the allocation of federal benefits (including apportionment of congres-
sional seats) should account for illegal aliens.
Race, Ethnicity, and Nationhood Although the humanitarian motives

that ostensibly underlie many U.S. immigration laws seldom are defined in
terms of race and ethnicity, the federal government frequently has controlled
immigration on the basis of national origin. Beginning during the 1920’s, the
United States established immigration quotas defined by national origin. Im-
migrants from European countries historically have been favored.
Immigration patterns have shifted dramatically over time, however, and not
always as a result of changes to U.S. immigration policy. During the 1950’s,
most immigrants came from Europe and Canada. By the 1970’s, partly as a re-
sult of international events, the majority of immigrants were coming from
Asia, Central America, and the Caribbean. The effects of different immigra-
tion patterns are compounded by higher birthrates among some immigrant
groups; such effects are further accentuated by the disproportionate number
of young adults among persons immigrating to the United States.
Consideration of immigration in terms of race and nationality raises the
461
One of the most discriminatory pieces of immigration legislation in U.S . history was the aptly
named Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This early twentieth century illustration from Puck suggests
five ways in which a Chinese immigrant (“John”) might enter the United States in violation of the
act: as an anarchist, as an Irishman, as an English wife-hunter, as a yacht racer, or as a Sicilian. A
joke underlying this cartoon was the fact that all five alternative immigrant types that it depicts
were also unpopular in the United States. (Library of Congress)
question of how the American people should be defined as a nation. The

sense of American nationhood stems more from shared morals, values, and
norms than from ethnic, racial, or even cultural characteristics. Yet the tradi-
tional conception of the United States as a “melting pot” of various ethnic
and racial groups was challenged during the 1980’s and 1990’s by critics who
claimed that such a concept unfairly pressures immigrants and racial minori-
ties to conform to a largely white, middle-class culture. In its place, such crit-
ics offered a “salad bowl” metaphor of the United States, envisioning the vari-
ous cultures of America’s citizens as retained in a diverse mosaic. In this view,
assimilation, including perhaps even the mastery of English language, is un-
necessary and perhaps undesirable. Nevertheless, immigrant groups them-
selves overwhelmingly desire to adopt American mores and culture, believe
that people who come to the United States should learn to speak English, and
sense that the country suffers from excessive immigration.
Immigration policies thus cut to the heart of the U.S. sense of nationhood.
By defining who can live in the country, who can receive services, and what is
required to become a citizen, the government defines what it means to be an
American. These policies also describe the nation’s sense of its moral obliga-
tions to foreign persons in need, and the enforcement of these policies helps
to direct the future makeup of the American population.
462
Government Policies American immigration policy has shifted widely

over time. Although much of the country’s early growth was fed by immigra-
tion, the United States has periodically restricted immigration in general or
the entry of certain groups in particular. An example of the latter is the Chi-
nese Exclusion Act of 1882, which was repealed in 1943. The first broad im-
migration control laws were established during the 1920’s with the National
Origins Act, which attempted to limit the inflow of immigrants and to fix the
ethnic proportions of the U.S. population via national quotas.
World War II, the Holocaust, and the political dislocations that followed
the war prompted the United States to revise its immigration laws. After a se-
ries of ad hoc alterations, in 1952 the Immigration and Nationality Act codi-
fied the disparate immigration laws and ended immigration and naturaliza-
tion prohibitions by race. The Hart-Celler Act of 1965 expanded the 1952 law,
ending national origin quotas entirely. In addition, this act established the re-
uniting of families as a goal of U.S. immigration policy. In a further move
away from group- and nationality-based admissions policies, the Refugee Act
of 1980 required that decisions to admit refugees be made on a case-by-case
basis.
By the 1980’s, the growing number of illegal immigrants had once again
pushed immigration reform into the public spotlight. The Immigration Re-
form and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, an attempt to balance the interests of
anti-immigrant and immigrant-rights groups, took two approaches to the
problem. To reduce illegal immigration, the act imposed sanctions on em-
ployers hiring illegal aliens and strengthened the country’s border enforce-
ment. At the same time, the IRCA granted amnesty to illegal aliens who had
resided in the country since at least 1982. Further modifications to immigra-
tion and refugee laws and policies continued throughout the 1980’s and early
1990’s, prompted partly by the end of the Cold War and the increase in civil
wars around the world. In 1990, for example, the Immigration Act raised im-
migration quotas by 40 percent, their highest level since 1914.
Steve D. Boilard
Further Reading
covered are government obligations to address humanitarian problems,
the impact of cultural diversity on American society, and enforcement of
laws regulating undocumented workers.
visiting aliens.
463
Deveaux, Monique. Cultural Pluralism and Dilemmas of Justice. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cor-
nell University Press, 2000. Thoughtful study of the ethical and legal prob-
lems arising in a pluralistic society such as that of the United States.
Houle, Michelle E., ed. Immigration. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Col-
lection of speeches on U.S. immigration policies by such historical figures
as Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy,
and Bill Clinton.
Canada.
law.
many, and Japan.
haven Press, 2004. Presents a variety of social, political, and legal view-
points of experts and observers familiar with immigration into the United
States.
See also Demographics of immigration; European immigrants, 1790-1892;

European immigrants, 1892-1943; History of U.S. immigration; Illegal aliens;
Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immigration “crisis”; Immigration
law; Migration; Undocumented workers.
464
Know-Nothing Party
Know-Nothing Party
Identification: Nativist political party
Date: 1852-1856
Immigration issues: Government and politics; Nativism and racism
Significance: During its brief ascendancy in the decade before the Civil War,
the Know-Nothing Party appealed to voters by campaigning for the inter-
ests of native-born Americans over those of immigrants.
The Know-Nothing Party was a political organization that prospered in the

United States between 1852 and 1856. During that period, the antiforeign
and anti-Catholic feelings of Americans concerned about the large numbers
of immigrants arriving in the United States, especially from Ireland, led to
the creation of political organizations grounded in prejudice. The secret Or-
der of the Star-Spangled Banner, informally known as the Know-Nothings be-
cause the phrase “I know nothing” was the response of members queried re-
garding the organization, emerged as the most prominent of the nativist
organizations.
The Know-Nothings eventually dropped their secrecy to become a force in
U.S. politics. Under a new name, the American Party, the Know-Nothings sur-
prised the nation with electoral victories in 1854 and 1855. The new party suc-
cessfully shifted attention away from the issue of slavery in many parts of the
country by playing on unrealistic fears of foreign and papal plots to control
the United States. The American Party platform called for reforming immi-
gration laws by limiting the number of immigrants and extending the time re-
quirement for naturalization. Former president Millard Fillmore, the Ameri-
can Party candidate for president in 1856, received 21 percent of the popular
vote but carried only the state of Maryland. Unable to emerge as a dominant
force in national politics, the American Party split into factions over the issue
of slavery.
Donald C. Simmons, Jr.
Further Reading
Holt, Michael. The Political Crisis of the 1850’s. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1978.
See also Anti-Irish Riots of 1844; German and Irish immigration of the
1840’s; History of U.S. immigration; Nativism; Xenophobia.
465
Korean immigrants
Korean immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the East Asia Korean
peninsula
Significance: Korean Americans are one of the fastest-growing ethnic groups

in the United States. Korean American businesses and churches have be-
come increasingly common, and members of other American ethnic groups
frequently come into contact with Koreans.
Koreans first began settling in the United States during the 1950’s, when
American servicemen serving in Korea returned home with brides and war
orphans. Korean migration to the United States continued at very low levels,
however, until the U.S. Congress changed immigration laws in 1965, giving
Asians the same opportunity as Europeans to settle in the United States. This
triggered an almost immediate increase in Korean migration: Although only
10,179 Koreans immigrated from 1961 to 1965, the number jumped to 25,618
in the next half-decade, from 1966 to 1970. As more Koreans made their
homes in the United States, more followed. During the period from 1986
Residents of Los Angeles’s Koreatown watching a parade with floats supporting political candi-
dates in South Korea’s presidential elections during the late 1980’s. (Korea Society/Los Angeles)
466
Korean immigrants
to 1990, 172,851 Koreans immi-

Korean Immigration
grated. By 1990, according to the to the United States,
U.S. Census of Population and 1948-2003
Housing, the Korean American
population had reached 750,000. 35,000
Between 1991 and 2003, Koreans 1950-1953
entered the United States at a rate 30,000 Korean
of about 16,600 immigrants per War

year. 25,000
After the 1965 change in immi-
gration law, Korean immigrants 20,000
were not only more numerous but
also more likely to come as entire
15,000
family groups. With large numbers
of Koreans in the United States,
they began to form Korean Amer- 10,000
ican communities instead of set-
tling as isolated individuals. Korean 5,000
businesses and Korean churches
began to appear in American cit- 0
ies and suburbs.
1948-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
California, with a 1990 Korean
American population of 259,941,
is home to the largest portion of
Koreans in the United States. Cal-
ifornia is followed by New York, Source: U.S . Census Bureau.
which had a Korean American pop-
ulation of 95,648 in 1990. Illinois, New Jersey, Texas, Maryland, Virginia, and
Washington also had large Korean populations.
Korean Businesses As new immigrants, Koreans often have few job op-
portunities in the United States. However, Koreans do have a strong tradition
of helping one another, and this has contributed to the growth of Korean-
owned businesses in the United States. In the rotating credit system known as
the kye, groups of Koreans pool money to make interest-free loans to group
members.
Changes in the U.S. economy also encouraged the development of Korean
businesses. During the 1970’s and 1980’s, as poverty became increasingly con-
centrated in American inner-city areas, many small business owners began
closing or selling stores in these areas. New Korean immigrants, who had lim-
ited English-language abilities and few contacts to find jobs in established
U.S. corporations, moved into ownership of small businesses. By the 1990’s,
Korean Americans had the highest rate of business ownership of any ethnic
or racial group, and more than half of all first-generation Korean immigrants
were self-employed.
467
Korean immigrants
Korean businesses have become the basis for many local and national Ko-
rean organizations. The Korean American Grocers’ Association is one of the
most important of the national business-based organizations, with local groups
in most areas that have substantial Korean populations. The Korean Dry
Cleaning and Laundry Association is another national Korean American or-
ganization based on small-business ownership.
The Korean pattern of employment has had consequences for the rela-
tions between Korean Americans and members of other groups. Koreans are
often highly dependent on one another for financial and social support,
sometimes creating the impression that they isolate themselves from the rest
of American society. They tend not to live in the inner-city neighborhoods
where they own their businesses, leading to cultural misunderstandings and
conflicts between Korean business owners and their customers, many of whom
are African American.
Korean Churches Although Korean culture is traditionally Confucian

and Buddhist, numerous Christian congregations, mostly Protestant, exist in
South Korea. It is estimated that about 70 percent of Korean Americans are
Christians and that the overwhelming majority of them are members of Ko-
rean churches. By the 1990’s, there were more than two thousand Korean
churches in the United States. Churches have become social centers for many
Korean Americans, places where they can come together with others who
speak their language and share their culture.
Korean American churches are places of worship, but they fulfill many
other needs as well. Church members provide one another with information
on available employment and housing. Language classes at churches teach
English to new immigrants and Korean to U.S.-born children. The churches
help to pass Korean culture on to children who may never have visited the
home country of their parents.
Koreans and American Society Korean businesses and churches both

help to maintain Korean Americans as a separate group in American soci-
ety. However, when U.S.-born Korean Americans become a larger propor-
tion of the population, the separateness of Korean Americans is likely to di-
minish.
Many Korean American business owners do not pass on their businesses to
their U.S.-born children. Instead, these children are typically encouraged to
achieve high educational levels and obtain professional jobs in U.S. corpora-
tions. Over time, then, the distinctive employment patterns of Korean Ameri-
cans are likely to disappear. Korean Americans have also shown increasing
rates of marriage with members of other racial and ethnic groups, suggesting
that members of this Asian ethnic group will gradually assimilate or blend
into the larger American society.
468
Korean immigrants and African Americans
Further Reading Comprehensive overviews of Korean immigration in-

clude Korean-Americans: Past, Present, and Future (Elizabeth, N.J.: Hollym In-
ternational, 2004), edited by Ilpyong J. Kim; Sheila Smith Noonan’s Korean
Immigration (Philadelphia: Mason Crest, 2004); and Stacy Taus-Bolstad’s Kore-
ans in America (Minneapolis: Lerner, 2005). From the Land of Morning Calm:
The Koreans in America (New York: Chelsea House, 1994), by Ronald Takaki,
uses documents on Korean immigration and oral histories of individual Ko-
rean Americans to help readers understand the background of this group. It
is illustrated with photographs and contains a chronology of Koreans in the
United States. Caught in the Middle: Korean Merchants in America’s Multiethnic
Cities (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), by Pyong Gap Min, looks
at the situation of Korean businessmen in urban neighborhoods and how
they are affected by racial and ethnic inequality in the United States. Blue
Dreams: Korean Americans and the Los Angeles Riots (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1995), by Nancy Abelmann and John Lie, is a detailed exami-
nation of the impact of the 1992 riots on Korean Americans. Other useful
studies include Moon H. Jo’s Korean Immigrants and the Challenge of Adjust-
ment (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1999), Nazli Kibria’s Becoming Asian
American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean American Identities (Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002), and Wayne Patterson’s The Ilsei: First-
Generation Korean Immigrants in Hawai’i, 1903-1973 (Honolulu: University of
Hawai’i Press, 2000). Ellen Alexander Conley’s The Chosen Shore: Stories of Im-
migrants (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004) is a collection of first-
hand accounts of modern immigrants from many nations, including two
from Korea.
See also Amerasians; Asian American education; Asian American stereo-

types; Korean immigrants and African Americans; Korean immigrants and
family customs; War brides; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Korean immigrants and

African Americans
Immigration issues: African Americans; Asian immigrants; Economics
Significance: Korean immigrants to the United States have tended to open

small businesses, such as groceries, in central areas of American cities,
where many of their customers have been African Americans. As a conse-
quence, sometimes culture clashes and conflicts occur between members
of these two minority groups.
469
Image Not Available
Ownership of a small business is the most common job for people of Korean
ancestry in the United States. Assisted by rotating credit associations (organiza-
tions that Koreans form to grant each other interest-free business loans requir-
ing little collateral), Korean Americans have specialized in self-employment
in small stores. The majority of Korean businesses in the United States are lo-
cated in California and New York. In 1990, according to the U.S. Bureau of
the Census, 44 percent of all Korean business owners lived in California and
12 percent of Korean business owners lived in New York. Within these states,
they were concentrated in the Los Angeles-Long Beach area and in New York
City.
Korean businesses are most often located in central areas of cities. During
the 1970’s and 1980’s, owners of inner-city businesses began to leave, and Ko-
reans, having access to business loans from their rotating loan associations
but few job opportunities in established American businesses, began buying
small urban shops. Although their businesses were in the city, the Koreans
tended to settle in the suburbs. The people who do live in central urban areas
and make up the majority of the customers in Korean businesses are African
Americans. Korean shop owners are often looked upon by their inner-city
customers as exploiters who come into neighborhoods to make a profit on
the people and then take the money elsewhere. These customers complain
470
about high prices, poor merchandise, and discourteous treatment. As new ar-
rivals to the United States, Korean merchants sometimes have trouble with
English and do not communicate well with those who come into their shops.
Korean businesspeople tend to hire other Koreans to work in their shops.
Most of these shops are family enterprises, so family members frequently pro-
vide labor. As a result, Koreans not only live outside the communities where
their stores are located but also hire few people who live in those communi-
ties. African Americans complain that Korean merchants do not hire black
employees, do not buy from black suppliers of goods, and do not invest in the
black neighborhoods in which they have located their businesses.
Although African American shoppers frequently view Koreans as outsiders
and exploiters, the Koreans sometimes look with suspicion on those living in
the neighborhoods where their businesses are located. Having little under-
standing of the history of U.S. racial inequality, Korean business owners may
see low-income urban residents as irresponsible and untrustworthy. The high
crime rates in these neighborhoods can lead them to see all members of the
communities, even the most honest, as potential shoplifters or robbers.
Mistrust and Culture Clash The cultural gap between African Ameri-
cans and the Korean Americans who often own stores in black neighbor-
hoods has resulted in a number of well-publicized clashes. In the spring of
1990, African Americans in Brooklyn began a nine-month boycott of Korean
stores after a Korean greengrocer allegedly harassed an African American
shopper. In 1992, trouble flared up again in the same neighborhood when an
African American customer in a Korean grocery was allegedly harassed and
struck by the owner and an employee. During 1995, an African American
man was arrested while attempting to burn down a Korean-owned store, and
both white and Korean store owners in Harlem received racial threats.
California, home to the nation’s greatest number of Korean businesses,
has seen some of the most serious conflicts between Koreans and African
Americans. In April of 1992, a judge gave a sentence of probation to a Korean
shopkeeper convicted in the shooting death of a fifteen-year-old African
American girl, Latasha Harlins. Two weeks after that, on April 29, riots broke
out in South Central Los Angeles after the acquittal of police officers who had
been videotaped beating an African American motorist, Rodney King. Al-
though none of the police officers was Korean, Korean groceries and liquor
stores in South Central Los Angeles became targets of the riots. The riots de-
stroyed more than one thousand Korean businesses and an estimated twenty-
three hundred Korean-owned businesses were looted.
Korean shop owners began leaving South Central Los Angeles in the years
after the riots. Those who remained became even more wary of the local pop-
ulation than they were previously.
Efforts at Improving Relations Korean and African American leaders

have made efforts to improve relations between the two groups. In the days
471
following the riots in Los Angeles, some African American and Korean lead-
ers formed the Black-Korean Alliance to improve communication and find
common ground. In New York, the Korean-American Grocer’s Association
has tried to find ways of bringing African Americans and Koreans together.
These have included sending African American community leaders on tours
of South Korea and providing African American students with scholarships to
Korean universities.
It may be difficult to resolve the problems between Korean merchants and
their African American customers as long as American central cities continue
to be places of concentrated unemployment and poverty. Investment in low-
income communities and the creation of economic opportunities for their
residents are probably necessary in order to overcome the suspicion and re-
sentment between members of these two minority groups.
Further Reading Up-to-date discussions of a variety of aspects of Korean-

African American relations can be found in Blacks and Asians in America: Cross-
ings, Conflict and Commonality (Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press, 2004),
edited by Hazel M. McFerson. Claire Jean Kim’s Bitter Fruit: The Politics of
Black-Korean Conflict in New York City (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press, 2000) examines the boycott of Korean stores in New York. In Patrick D.
Joyce’s No Fire Next Time: Black-Korean Conflicts and the Future of America’s Cities
(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2003), Koreans in the Hood: Conflict with
African Americans (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), edited
by Kwang Chung Kim and Caught in the Middle: Korean Merchants in America’s
Multiethnic Cities (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), by sociolo-
gist Pyong Gap Min the situation of Korean businesspeople in U.S. cities is ex-
amined. Nancy Abelmann and John Lie discuss the consequences for Kore-
ans of the 1992 Los Angeles riots in Blue Dreams: Korean Americans and the Los
Angeles Riots (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1995). Ivan Light
and Edna Bonacich give a history of Korean American business in Immigrant
Entrepreneurs: Koreans in Los Angeles, 1965-1982 (Berkeley: University of Cali-
fornia Press, 1988). Lauren Lee’s Korean Americans (New York: Marshall Cav-
endish, 1995) provides a readable, in-depth description of this ethnic group.
See also African immigrants; Asian American education; Asian American

stereotypes; Ethnic enclaves; Indigenous superordination; Korean immigrants;
Korean immigrants and family customs; War brides; “Yellow peril” campaign.
472
Korean immigrants and family customs
Korean immigrants and

family customs
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Families and marriage
Significance: Korean American families have faced the challenges of bal-

ancing the conservative, traditional principles of their ancestral home-
land, Korea, with the more liberal, egalitarian beliefs of the American
family.
Most Korean Americans have strong family ties to South Korea. Confucian
principles influence social and familial behavior. A patrilineal system domi-
nates the traditional Korean family, which means that husbands are the
commanders of their wives and families. Wives are expected to obey their hus-
band and serve their husbands’ parents and families. Wives’ must bear chil-
dren to perpetuate their husband’s family lineage.
According to Confucian philosophy and centuries of tradition, Korean
women obey their fathers until their marriage, at which time they must obey
their husbands. After their husbands die, they must obey their sons. These
strong patrilineal beliefs have posed difficulties when Koreans emigrate to
the United States and attempt to adapt to mainstream American culture,
which often tends to encourage gender equality. However, such unique tradi-
tional values as found among Korean immigrants in the United States help
Korean Americans maintain their cultural identity and focus on the rich tra-
ditions of their native country.
Historical Overview Koreans traveled to America after 1882, when the

Korean American trade and travel treaty was signed. American missionaries
traveled to Korea to convert Korean Buddhists to Christianity. Sheltered and
submissive Korean women found that church work offered them some free-
dom and was socially rewarding. From 1903 to 1905 seven thousand Koreans
emigrated to the United States for political and financial reasons. Some of
the first Korean immigrants were men working on Hawaiian sugar planta-
tions. Emigrating to the mainland, they searched for better conditions in ag-
ricultural areas and for opportunities in the professions they learned in their
native Korea. Some Americans resented the fact that Korean immigrants took
jobs in the United States and excluded them from participating in the profes-
sions. As a result, Koreans often started their own businesses in city districts
where Korean families clustered.
The influx of Koreans to America slowly grew. By 1940 there were 8,568 Ko-
rean Americans. The Korean War, which ended in 1953, increased Korean
immigration. Many U.S. servicemen returned home from the Korean War
473
with Korean brides, while Korean students enrolled in U.S. colleges and
American families adopted Korean infants. The 1965 Immigration and Na-
tionality Act also contributed to the increase in Korean Americans by easing
immigration restrictions. The 1990 U.S. Census Bureau reported that there
were almost 800,000 Koreans in the United States.
The Canadian Employment Equity Act of 1986 classified Korean Canadi-
ans as a “visible minority.” This act allowed the Canadian government to col-
lect data on Korean Canadians as well as on other minorities and ethnic im-
migrants in Canada during the 1980’s. About one third of Korean Canadians
emigrated to Canada during the 1980’s.
Demographics Korean Americans and Canadians live primarily in urban

areas. In the United States, Honolulu, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York
are important cities with substantial Korean populations. In some cities geo-
graphic areas have developed which have come to be known as Koreatowns.
Approximately 50 percent of Korean Canadians lived in the Toronto vicinity
in 1991.
Education of men, which is valued in Korean culture, stems from historical
Confucian beliefs. Koreans believe that success, power, and respect are attain-
able with education.
Members of a Los Angeles Korean church on Easter Sunday in 1950. Christian churches play an
important role in promoting fellowship among Korean immigrants and their families. (University of
Southern California, East Asian Library)
474
Some 57 percent of Korean Canadians had university degrees during the

late 1990’s, more than any other visible minority group. The high educational
levels that Koreans have attained are evidenced by the large percentages of
Korean professionals, managers, and entrepreneurs. In the United States,
40 percent of Korean men own businesses, such as grocery stores or dry clean-
ers. Many Korean medical professionals are forced to work in high-crime,
inner-city areas because of the difficulties they face in finding jobs. In spite of
such problems, unemployment rates among Koreans are low. They accept dif-
ficult working conditions and set themselves the goal of acquiring enough
capital to improve their situation. The success of Korean-owned businesses
has been attributed to the fact that Koreans work long hours, have strong
work ethics, and make sacrifices for their families.
Family Interaction with Mainstream Society The business success of

Korean immigrants has caused resentment among other ethnic groups. In
some cities African American and Korean relations have suffered because
of cultural differences. The 1992 Los Angeles upheaval seriously affected lo-
cal Korean businesses. Many were vandalized, looted, or burned. Korean
Americans have better relations with Latinos. Both are entrepreneurial eth-
nic groups, and many Korean Americans speak Spanish as a second language.
Some Korean youth feel that they play dual roles as immigrants. They be-
lieve that being Korean American is a high-maintenance ethnic status. Even
Korean children born in the United States are often expected to speak Ko-
rean and English, know Korean geography, and marry other Koreans. The
majority of Korean Americans speak the Korean language at home. Korean
American teenagers face some difficulties at school because of the language
barrier that isolates their parents. The limited English proficiency of many
parents is a cause for concern among both parents and children.
Traditional Korean culture is significantly different from American cul-
ture. Traditional Koreans place high value on filial piety. This devotion to
older family members and particularly to husbands’ families is lacking in
American culture. Aging Korean parents expect that their children will re-
spect them, and parents are frustrated when their children do not.
Korean American wives are burdened by double roles, while husbands are
frustrated by the Americanization of their wives. Women must balance the
role of traditional Korean wives, whose goal is to serve their husbands’ fami-
lies, with the role of employed American wives, whose goals are gender equal-
ity, personal satisfaction, and independence. Korean American husbands, in-
fluenced by filial piety, may fear their wives’ challenge to male dominance at
home. They feel that the gradual lessening of their wives’ obedience is a prob-
lem that stems from American culture.
Maintaining Cultural Identity In fulfilling social and religious roles,

Korean churches adhere closely to traditional Korean beliefs. They encour-
age fellowship among Korean immigrants; provide social services for their
475
congregations and the community, such as helping immigrants adjust to the

new culture; and provide their members opportunities for leadership and sta-
tus among Korean Americans. Sundays are often filled with activities spon-
sored by Korean churches. After Sunday services, congregations may have
Love Feasts, at which traditional Korean foods are served. Churches teach
children Korean culture in Sunday afternoon workshops or summer camps.
Korean American churches preserve and promote traditional customs and
festivals, as well as adapt customs to American ways. The Korean Lunar New
Year’s Day festival, called Sol-Nal, occurs in January or February. Like New
Year’s Day in the West, Lunar New Year’s Day is a time to celebrate and make
resolutions. Korean families gather for memorial services honoring ancestors
or visit living elders. New clothes, special foods, candles, and incense are im-
portant to this festival.
The Harvest Moon Festival is celebrated in September or October on the
fifteenth day of the eighth lunar month. Its purpose is to give thanks for suc-
cessful harvests and is thus similar to Thanksgiving in the United States. An-
cestors are honored during the Harvest Moon Festival. Festive foods, such as
fruits, vegetables, zucchini pancakes, meat, rice, and wine are served. Crescent-
shaped rice cakes filled with sweet sesame seeds or bean paste are the high-
light of the Harvest Moon Festival. Moon-viewing is important to the festival
and has inspired Korean poetry.
In Korea, traditional weddings were arranged by brides’ and groom’s par-
ents. Often, brides and grooms met for the first time at their wedding. During
the late twentieth century, western traditions of dating, love, engagements,
and white wedding gowns have become the cultural norm among Korean
Americans. Some Korean Americans have two wedding ceremonies, a Chris-
tian and a Buddhist one. Wedding feasts may be held in honor of brides and
grooms, because food is an important part of such ceremonies. Tables are
laden with traditional Korean foods such as Kimchi, or spicy preserved cab-
bage; pulgolgi, or spicy beef; fish; rice; noodles; and vegetables.
Korean American families have managed to retain some of the cultural
norms of traditional Korea while adapting to their current life conditions in
the United States and Canada. They have found ways to synthesize Korean
and American values by adapting both. Unique values will eventually emerge,
allowing Korean Americans to balance change with continuity.
Celia Stall-Meadows
Further Reading
Jo, Moon H. Korean Immigrants and the Challenge of Adjustment. Westport, Conn.:
Greenwood Press, 1999.
Kibria, Nazli. Becoming Asian American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean
American Identities. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002.
476
Ku Klux Klan
Koh, Frances. Korean Holidays and Festivals. Minneapolis: EastWest Press, 1990.
Kwon, Okyun. Buddhist and Protestant Korean Immigrants: Religious Beliefs and
Socioeconomic Aspects of Life. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2003.
Patterson, Wayne. The Ilse: First-Generation Korean Immigrants in Hawai’i, 1903-
1973. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2000.
See also Amerasians; Asian American education; Asian American stereo-

types; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Filipino immigrants and fam-
ily customs; Korean immigrants; Korean immigrants and African Americans;
Southeast Asian immigrants; Vietnamese immigrants; War brides; “Yellow
peril” campaign.
Ku Klux Klan
Identification: White supremacist organization
Place: Pulaski, Tennessee
Immigration issues: African Americans; Civil rights and liberties; Discrimi-

nation
Significance: After the Civil War, a group of white supremacists, disaffected

by the war’s outcome, grew into an organization of institutionalized race
hatred and anti-immigrant sentiment that has survived into the twenty-first
century.
With the end of the Civil War and the emancipation of African American
slaves in the South, tension arose between old-order Southern whites and
Radical Republicans devoted to a strict plan of Reconstruction that required
southern states to repeal their black codes and guarantee voting and other
civil rights to African Americans. Federal instruments for ensuring African
American rights included the Freedmen’s Bureau and the Union Leagues. In
reaction to the activities of these organizations, white supremacist organiza-
tions sprouted in the years immediately following the Civil War: the Knights
of the White Camelia, the White League, the Invisible Circle, the Pale Faces,
and the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).
Beginnings The last of these would eventually lend its name to a confeder-
ation of such organizations, but in 1866 it was born in Pulaski, Tennessee, as
a fraternal order for white, male, Anglo-Saxon Protestants joined by their
opposition to Radical Reconstructionism and an agenda to promote white,
Southern dominance. This incarnation of the Klan established many of the
477
Ku Klux Klan
Hooded Klansmen marching in Virginia in early 1922. Much of the power of the Klan to intimidate
immigrants and members of minority groups was based on its secretiveness and the spookiness of
its members hooded outfits. (Library of Congress)
weird rituals and violent activities for which the KKK became known through-
out its history. They named the South the “invisible empire,” with “realms”
consisting of the southern states. A “grand dragon” headed each realm, and
the entire “empire” was led by Grand Wizard General Nathan B. Forrest. Posi-
tions of leadership were dubbed “giant,” “cyclops,” “geni,” “hydra,” and “gob-
lin.” The white robes and pointed cowls stem from this era; these were
donned in the belief that African Americans were superstitious and would be
intimidated by the menacing, ghostlike appearance of their oppressors, who
thus also maintained anonymity while conducting their activities.
Soon the Klan was perpetrating acts of violence, including whippings,
house-burnings, kidnappings, and lynchings. As the violence escalated, For-
rest disbanded the Klan in 1869, and on May 31, 1870, and April 20, 1871,
Congress passed the Ku Klux Klan Acts, or Force Acts, designed to break up
the white supremacist groups.
Second Rise of the Klan The next rise of the Klan presaged the period of
the Red Scare (1919-1920) and the Immigration Act of 1921, the first such
legislation in the United States to establish immigration quotas on the basis
of national origin. In November, 1915, in Stone Mountain, Georgia, a second
Ku Klux Klan was founded by preacher William J. Simmons, proclaiming it a
“high-class, mystic, social, patriotic” society devoted to defending woman-
hood, white Protestant values, and “native-born, white, gentile Americans.”
Such an image of the Klan was perpetrated by the popular 1915 film Birth of a
Nation, in which a lustful African American is shown attempting to attack a
white woman, and the Klan, in robes and cowls, rides to the rescue.
478
Ku Klux Klan
The new Klan cloaked itself as a patriotic organization devoted to preserv-

ing traditional American values against enemies in the nation’s midst. An up-
surge of nationalist fervor swelled the ranks of the Klan, this time far beyond
the borders of the South. This second Klan adopted the rituals and regalia
of its predecessor as well as the same anti-black ideology, to which it added
anti-Roman Catholic, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-birth-control, anti-
Darwinist, and anti-Prohibition stances. Promoted by ad-man Edward Y.
Clarke, its membership reached approximately 100,000 by 1921 and over the
next five years, by some estimates, grew to 5 million, including even members
of Congress.
The second Klan perpetrated more than five hundred hangings and burn-
ings of African Americans. In 1924, forty thousand Klansmen marched down
Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., sending a message to the federal
government that there should be a white, Protestant United States. Finally,
the Klan’s growing wave of violence alienated many of its members, whose
numbers dropped to about 30,000 by 1930.
Klan activities increased again prior to World War II, and membership rose
toward the 100,000 mark, but in 1944 Congress assessed the organization
more than a half million dollars in back taxes, and the Klan dissolved itself
to escape. Two years later, however, Atlanta physician Samuel Green united
smaller Klan groups into the Association of Georgia Klans and was soon
joined by other reincarnations, such as the Federated Ku Klux Klans, the
Original Southern Klans, and the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. These groups
revived the agenda of previous Klans and were responsible for hundreds of
criminal acts. Of equal concern was the Klan’s political influence: A governor
of Texas was elected with the support of the Klan, as was a senator from
Maine. Even a Supreme Court justice, Hugo L. Black, revealed in 1937 that he
had been a member of the Ku Klux Klan.
Challenges During the 1940’s, many states passed laws that revoked Klan
charters, and many southern communities issued regulations against masks.
The U.S. Justice Department placed the Klan on its list of subversive ele-
ments, and in 1952 the Federal Bureau of Investigation used the Lindbergh
law (one of the 1934 Crime Control Acts) against the Klan. Another direct
challenge to the principles of the KKK came during the 1960’s with the ad-
vent of the Civil Rights movement and civil rights legislation. Martin Luther
King, Jr., prophesied early in the decade that it would be a “season of suf-
fering.”
On September 15, 1963, a Klan bomb tore apart the Sixteenth Street Bap-
tist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, killing four young children. Despite
the outrage of much of the nation, the violence continued, led by members of
the Klan who made a mockery of the courts and the laws that they had bro-
ken. Less than a year after the bombing, three civil rights workers were killed
in Mississippi, including one African American and two whites from the
North involved in voter registration. This infamous event was later docu-
479
Ku Klux Klan
mented in the motion picture Mississippi Burning. Viola Lee Liuzzo was killed
for driving freedom marchers from site to site. Such acts prompted President
Lyndon B. Johnson, in a televised speech in March, 1965, to denounce the
Klan as he announced the arrest of four Klansmen for murder.
After the conviction of many of its members during the 1960’s, the organi-
zation became somewhat dormant, and its roster of members reflected low
numbers. Nevertheless, as it had in previous periods of dormancy, the Klan
refused to die. Busing for integration of public schools during the 1970’s en-
gendered Klan opposition in the South and the North. In 1979, in Greens-
boro, North Carolina, Klan members killed several members of the Commu-
nist Party in a daylight battle on an open street. Klan members have patrolled
the Mexican border, armed with weapons and citizen-band radios, trying to
send illegal aliens back to Mexico.
The Klan has been active in suburban California, at times driving out Afri-
can Americans who attempted to move there. On the Gulf Coast, many boats
fly the infamous AKIA flag, an acronym for “A Klansman I Am,” a motto that
dates back to the 1920’s. Klan members have tried to discourage or run out
Vietnamese fishers. Klan leaders active since 1970 include James Venable, for
whom the Klan became little more than a hobby, and Bill Wilkinson, a former
disciple of David Duke. Robert Shelton, long a grand dragon, helped elect
two Alabama governors. Duke, a Klan leader until the late 1980’s, decided to
run for political office and was elected a congressman from Louisiana despite
his well-publicized past associations; in 1991, he ran for governor, almost win-
ning. During the 1980’s the Klan stepped up its anti-Semitic activities, plan-
ning multiple bombings in Nashville, Tennessee. Klan leaders during the
1990’s have trained their members and their children for what they believe is
an imminent race war, learning survival skills and weaponry at remote camps
throughout the country.
A major blow was struck against the Klan by the Klanwatch Project of the
Southern Poverty Law Center, in Montgomery, Alabama, when, in 1984, at-
torney Morris Dees began pressing civil suits against several Klan members,
effectively removing their personal assets, funds received from members, and
even buildings owned by the Klan.
Further Reading
Chalmers, David. Backfire: How the Ku Klux Klan Helped the Civil Rights Move-
ment. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Study of the Klan’s contri-
butions to focusing public attention on the justness of the aims of the Civil
Rights movement.
____________. Hooded Americanism: The History of the Ku Klux Klan. New York:
F. Watts, 1981. Considered the bible of books about the Klan, this study has
seen numerous editions and updatings.
Ezekiel, Raphael. The Racist Mind: Portraits of American Neo-Nazis and Klansmen.
New York: Viking Press, 1995. Explores conditions of childhood, educa-
tion, and other factors in an attempt to explain racist behavior.
480
Latinos
Quarles, Chester L. The Ku Klux Klan and Related American Racialist and Anti-
semitic Organizations: A History and Analysis. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland,
1999. General overview of the history of white racist organizations.
Randel, William. The Ku Klux Klan: A Century of Infamy. Philadelphia: Chilton
Books, 1965. Excellent history of origins and events that also uses a moral
perspective.
Stanton, Bill. Klanwatch: Bringing the Ku Klux Klan to Justice. New York: Wei-
denfeld, 1991. A former Klanwatch director explains new initiatives to dis-
able the Klan, most of which have been effective.
Wade, Wyn Craig. The Fiery Cross: The Ku Klux Klan in America. New York: Si-
mon & Schuster, 1987. Wade recounts the Klan’s history and episodes of vi-
olence, revealing its legacy of race hatred.
See also African immigrants; Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants;

Discrimination; History of U.S. immigration.
Latinos
Identification: Immigrants to the United States and their descendants of
Latin American origin
Immigration issues: Border control; Cuban immigrants; Demographics; La-

bor; Latino immigrants; West Indian immigrants
Significance: According to the 2000 U.S. Census, more than 16 million resi-
dents of the United States were born in Latin American nations; this num-
ber represented 52 percent of all foreign-born residents of the country.
The large and growing Latino minority has had a significant impact on the
United States, both culturally and economically. Although linked by lan-
guage, Latinos are a diverse group, consisting of many different races and
nations of origin.
The Latino minority, also often referred to as the Hispanic American sector
of United States society, continues to increase proportionately to the total
population with each succeeding decade. In 1996, some 25 million (9.7 per-
cent) of residents of the United States traced their cultural, racial, or ethnic
origins to some Spanish or Portuguese antecedents. Included in this group
are recent immigrants, those who have arrived from Latin American nations
both legally and illegally, and U.S. citizens whose families have been residents
of the United States for many generations. The combination of this group’s
high birthrate coupled with the constant influx of immigrants into the United
States has led to the prediction that by the year 2020 the total Latino popula-
481
Latinos
tion of the United States will exceed 51 million, representing 15.7 percent of
an estimated total U.S. population of 326 million.
Although Latinos share a common cultural heritage, and most of them
share a common linguistic heritage, the Latino population of the United
States is far from a homogeneous cultural group. Its members can be charac-
terized better by their diversity than by their similarity. Strong nationalistic
identification with their countries or regions of origin serves to divide Mexi-
can Americans from Cuban Americans from Puerto Ricans—and a host of
other nationals—and to mitigate against their acting in concert politically,
economically, or socially. For example, the large Cuban American colony in
greater Miami, Florida, tends to be highly conservative politically, while the
Puerto Ricans of New York state and the Mexican Americans of California
generally are Democratic or liberal in political affiliation.
Latin American Migration to the United States

Year Event Impact
1910-1920 Mexican Ten years of political and economic chaos force a
Revolution quarter million Mexicans to resettle north of the
U.S.-Mexico border.
1942-1964 Bracero Wartime labor shortages create a need for
program farmworkers that is filled by a Mexican and U.S.
program that brings Mexicans to the United
States to work the fields. The program establishes
a pattern of migration of farmworkers.
1945-1950 Puerto Rican Following World War II, seventy-five-dollar
immigration economy air flights permit thousands of Puerto
Ricans to resettle in the New York area. Since
Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens, no official entry
papers are required.
1957-1960 Cuban The takeover by the leftist Fidel Castro sends
Revolution more than one million Cuban businesspeople
and professionals to Miami.
1980-1990 Central Civil wars in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and
American Guatemala send more than one million political
conflicts and economic refugees north, mostly to
California and the East Coast.
1981-1990’s Mexican The continuing erratic behavior of the Mexican
economic economy, in addition to the inability of the
crises country to provide employment for those
entering the workforce each year, sends a
constant wave of Mexican immigrants north to
find work.
482
Latinos
Race and Ethnicity Members of the Latino community run the gamut of
virtually every racial and ethnic group found in the world. The initial voyages
of exploration and discovery of the Western Hemisphere by Europeans from
Spain, England, Portugal, France, and the Netherlands led quickly to a racial
amalgamation of these primarily light-skinned European immigrants with
the bronze-skinned indigenous peoples mistakenly called “Indians” (under
the false belief that they occupied the Asian continent). This admixture of
races resulted in what has been referred to as the mestizo, soon to become the
predominant racial entity throughout much of Central and South America,
as well as what would ultimately become the U.S. Southwest.
When the European settlers in Mexico, Central America, and South Amer-
ica found that they could not successfully exploit the indigenous peoples in
mining and agriculture, they turned to the importation of Africans, initially
as indentured servants but ultimately as slaves. England, France, Portugal,
Spain, and the Netherlands entered into an extensive and lucrative tranship-
ment of Africans to the Western Hemisphere, where they were sold as labor
for the mining of precious metals and the manufacture of sugar, cotton, rice,
and a wide variety of other marketable crops.
Owners of black slaves bred their human chattels with other slaves as part
of the existing economic system, and soon African Americans—now typed as
mulattos, quadroons, octoroons, and other racial mixtures—became part of
a gene pool already containing a mixture of European and American Indian
strains. In the course of the centuries that followed, Asians joined the hetero-
geneous racial population that spread throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Chinese settled in substantial numbers along the borders of Mexico’s north-
ernmost states. Faced with persecution by warring factions during the Mexi-
can Revolution of 1910, they migrated to the United States in large numbers.
Religion When Europeans landed in what became Mexico in the six-

teenth century, they encountered a highly civilized society that was in many
ways more advanced than that of Europe at the time. Spaniards, however, did
not perceive or value the cultural sophistication of the newly discovered civili-
zation—considering it their responsibility, on the contrary, to replace what
they perceived as a heretic religion (in which the Aztec emperor was revered
as a demigod) with Roman Catholicism. The Europeans therefore adopted a
program of ruthless destruction of what they considered idolatry.
Similarly, in other parts of the continent, Portuguese, French, and English
forced their own brands of Christianity on the native peoples whom they con-
quered and exploited. In the initial four centuries following the opening of
the hemisphere, Catholicism and Protestantism became the dominant reli-
gions throughout North, South, and Central America.
Nevertheless, some indigenous peoples attempted to retain their identifi-
cation with their old gods. Often this took the form of hiding their ancient sa-
cred images behind the altars of European places of worship. Today, in more
tolerant times, native and European religions are often practiced side by side,
483
Latinos
venerating gods and saints together, although by different names, as can be

seen in modern Guatemala.
African slaves, seized and transported from their native lands to the West-
ern Hemisphere, often brought their native religions with them, a source of
comfort and hope under truly trying conditions. These African religions,
sometimes modified by exposure to Christian sects, have open, active com-
municants in countries such as Haiti, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and
Brazil. Immigrants to the United States from these nations often bring these
ancestral religious practices with them. These religious societies play an ac-
tive role in the daily lives of their followers in the United States.
Language Most second- and third-generation Latinos in the United States

have a good command of English. Newcomers, however—like most immi-
grants from non-English-speaking nations—often lack basic English-language
skills, severely limiting their ability to progress economically, politically, and
socially. In a few areas, there are neighborhoods large and insular enough in
their organization, where Spanish is so widely spoken among commercial es-
tablishments that English is unnecessary to carry on daily activities. Opportu-
nities exist in most areas for newcomers to acquire basic English skills neces-
sary to move into the mainstream of U.S. culture. Nevertheless, immigrants
from isolated communities to the south, often still committed to tribal mores
and language, find it difficult to blend into the larger culture. Some do not
even speak Spanish but depend on their native languages, such as Mayan,
Quechua, and Nahuatl, for communication. Lacking either English or Span-
ish, quite often these small, essentially tribal, groups are subject to exploita-
tion by unscrupulous business interests and often are forced to work for mis-
erably low wages and threatened with being turned into U.S. immigration
authorities if they seek redress under the law.
Mexico Mexico leads all other nations both in the number of foreign-born
living in the United States and in the quantity of new arrivals each year. With a
population approaching 100 million, Mexico cannot provide enough jobs for
those entering its workforce every year. This pool of surplus labor, combined
with the availability of unskilled or entry-level jobs in the United States, has
accounted for Mexico’s primary position in terms of immigrant influx.
Included in this wave of new arrivals are members of Mexico’s Indian com-
munities, who speak a variety of tribal tongues as their first language. Pri-
marily from rural areas and with a minimum of education, they are subject to
economic exploitation to a greater degree than are other immigrants.
Mexicans have lived in areas in what is now the United States before they
were incorporated into the union. Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Califor-
nia were under the Mexican flag until the Mexican War of 1846-1848. The
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo signed in 1848 between the two countries ceded
this territory to the United States for $15 million—a cheap price for the
Americans.
484
Latinos
Mexican Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
250,000
240,000
230,000
220,000
210,000
200,000
190,000
180,000
170,000
160,000 1942-1964
150,000 Bracero
140,000 program
130,000
120,000 1930’s
110,000 U.S. deportations
100,000 of Mexican workers
90,000
80,000 1910-1920
70,000 Mexican
60,000 Revolution
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Puerto Rico The United States defeated Spain in the brief Spanish-
American War in 1898. In the ensuing Treaty of Paris, Spain gave up Puerto
Rico, the Philippine Islands, and Guam to the victorious Americans. The
United States also reluctantly agreed to the island of Cuba’s independence
under that treaty. However, the Americans retained sovereignty over Puerto
Rico, viewing it as critical to U.S. defenses in the event of an attack from the
Caribbean. In 1953, Puerto Rico achieved Commonwealth status, becoming a
self-governing territory.
Following World War II, thousands of Puerto Ricans moved to the conti-
485
Latinos
nental United States. In the immediate postwar period, airplane fares to the
mainland sold for as little as seventy-five dollars. Almost three million Latin
American citizens now live in the Northeast, mostly in the New York area. Be-
cause they are by law U.S. citizens, immigrants from the island are required
only to demonstrate proof of birth in Puerto Rico before entering the conti-
nental United States.
Cuba The takeover in 1959 of the island of Cuba by Fidel Castro and his
supporters resulted in a mass exodus of much of the country’s upper-class
and middle-class professional and business interests, who did not agree with
the imposition of what eventually became a socialist, communist-supported,
regime. Numbering close to one million, most of these refugees established
themselves initially in the greater Miami area. In the spring of 1980, a second
wave of refugees, called Marielitos and numbering perhaps one hundred
thousand, managed to immigrate, with the permission of both the Castro re-
gime and the administration of President Jimmy Carter, to the United States.
The Cuban community, still centered in southern Florida, developed into a
powerful economic and political force. During the 1990’s, desperate Cubans
continued to attempt to escape to the United States utilizing primitive boats,
rafts, and even inner tubes.
Central America Throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s, the countries of El

Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua were plagued by civil wars. As a conse-
quence of those unsettled political times, between one million and one and a
half million Central American refugees had easy access, since the United
States compared the leftist government of Daniel Ortega to Castro’s regime
in Cuba. U.S. supporters of Salvadoran and Guatemalan refugees insisted on
the same opportunity for victims of political oppression in those countries as
well.
Most of these three groups have continued to remain in this country
through one form of amnesty or another, concentrating in California, Flor-
ida, and communities on the eastern seaboard.
Dominican Republic As has been the case with so many of the small Carib-
bean island nations, the Dominican Republic cannot furnish enough job op-
portunities for all its citizens. Depending primarily on the export of sugar,
some mining, and the attraction of cruise ships to its ports, this country,
which shares the island of Hispaniola with Haiti, exports a substantial num-
ber of its working-class citizenry as well.
Many Dominican immigrants seeking illegal entry into the United States
have used Puerto Rico as a staging area. False documents are obtained to es-
tablish a Puerto Rican identity. Most Dominicans have gravitated to the New
York area after arriving in the United States. The little island nation ranked
fourteenth in recent figures on immigration to the United States.
486
Latinos
Other Latin Americans The balance of the Western Hemisphere’s Latin

American countries have contributed immigrants as well, although generally
as smaller percentages of their total populations. For example, the drug trade
and the resulting political unrest has caused Bolivians, Peruvians, and Colom-
bians to seek asylum in the United States, which continues to represent a bea-
con of hope to citizens of those countries where political disorder or eco-
nomic deprivation threaten the lives of their citizens.
Diversity vs. Unity Despite the formidable growth of the Latino element
in U.S. society, its diversity has prevented this group from reaching its poten-
tial as a unitary political force. Instead, the members of each particular ethnic
entity have shown a preference to confine their organizational efforts to mem-
bers of their own particular community—to establish themselves as Mexican
American, Cuban American, or Puerto Rican political associations, with
membership confined to their own ethnic group. Nevertheless, should there
come a time when diverse organizations such as these come to realize the po-
tential strength that their combined numbers represent, the fast-growing La-
tino contingent could become a major factor in determining the course of
the future of the United States. In the interim, the Latino sons of immigrants
have followed the paths of other racial and ethnic minorities in U.S. society
in past decades. Many, showing a high degree of individual initiative, have
worked their way into positions of greater responsibility in business and the
professions.
Carl Henry Marcoux
Further Reading
Bohon, Stephanie. Latinos in Ethnic Enclaves: Immigrant Workers and the Compe-
tition for Jobs. New York: Garland, 2000. Examination of Latino employ-
ment in major urban centers.
ern immigrants from many nations, including Bolivia, Cuba, and Mexico.
Crosthwaite, Luis Humberto, John William Byrd, and Bobby Byrd, eds. Puro
Border: Dispatches, Snapshots and Graffiti from La Frontera. El Paso, Tex.:
Cinco Puntos Press, 2003. Collage of illustrations and writings that at-
tempts to portray the various cultural and geographical considerations of
those people who live on the line.
United States.
Fox, Geoffrey. Hispanic Nation. Secaucus, N.J.: Carol Publishing Group, 1996.
Argues that the old political and cultural differences that divided various
Latino groups have already begun to diminish and that Latinos in the
487
Latinos and employment
twenty-first century will become the largest and most influential minority
in the United States.
to the United States. Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm, 2005. Reexamination of the
history of Mexican immigration to the United States that looks at the sub-
ject in the context of American dominance over Mexico.
immigrant groups, including Mexicans, through the early twentieth cen-
tury.
López, David, and Andrés Jiménez, eds. Latinos and Public Policy in California:
An Agenda for Opportunity. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Public Policy Press,
2003. Collection of essays on the condition and government treatment of
Latinos in California.
Nevin, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the “Illegal Alien” and the Making
of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge, 2002. Details the federal
government’s Operation Gatekeeper, which in the 1990’s targeted the San
Diego-Tijuana border in efforts to stop illegal immigration. The author
argues that this assault on immigration did not effectively reduce unau-
thorized immigration and served to inflame anti-Hispanic racism in the
United States.
ity. New York: New York University Press, 2000. Study of the demographics
of the Latino population of the United States.
See also Censuses, U.S.; Chicano movement; Cuban immigrants; Cuban

immigrants and African Americans; Dominican immigrants; Immigration
“crisis”; Japanese Peruvians; Latinos and employment; Latinos and family
customs; League of United Latin American Citizens; Mexican American Le-
gal Defense and Education Fund; Proposition 227; Undocumented workers.

Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Economics; Labor; Latino immi-
grants
Significance: Latinos occupied a comparatively disadvantaged position in

the U.S. labor market relative to the white population and to other minori-
ties throughout the twentieth century. This overall trend, however, varied
over time in response to changes in the economy.
488
Latinos were the fastest-growing minority group in the United States during
the last quarter of the twentieth century. In 1980, they made up 6.5 percent of
the civilian population, and by 1996, they had increased to 10.6 percent. The
Bureau of the Census projected that this group would reach 14 percent of the
total U.S. population by the year 2010. Empirical research on their employ-
ment situation has lagged behind such rapid changes, and it is difficult to dis-
cern patterns and trends when the available statistical information is not bro-
ken down into national-origin subgroups.
Historical Background During the late nineteenth century and early

twentieth century, Mexican laborers (mainly displaced peasants) began to
cross the border into the American Southwest to find work. Throughout the
twentieth century, U.S. immigration policy alternatively encouraged and re-
stricted the entry of Mexicans, but the net result has been essentially a steady
stream of immigrants. Their numbers, along with the descendants of earlier
Mexican immigrants, have made Mexicans the largest subgroup of Latinos in
the United States.
During World War I, Puerto Ricans were granted citizenship to ease U.S. la-
bor shortages. By 1920, nearly 12,000 Puerto Ricans had left their home for
the United States, settling mostly in New York City and finding employment
mainly in manufacturing and services. Their numbers have grown, making
them the second largest Latino subgroup.
Cubans constitute the third most numerous subgroup. From 1959, the
year when Fidel Castro assumed power following the Cuban Revolution, to
1990, the Cuban population in the United States—which had previously
numbered only about 30,000—grew to 1,044,000 people.
The Latino Labor Force The Latino share in the civilian labor force was
5.7 percent of the total in 1980, but it had almost doubled by 1996, to 9.6 per-
cent. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projected further growth to 11 percent
by the year 2005.
During the 1980’s and 1990’s, the labor force participation rates (that is,
the percentage of persons who are employed) for the Latino population age
sixteen and older approximated those of the non-Latino white population
in the same age group (66.5 percent for Latinos and 67.2 percent for non-
Latino whites in 1996). However, the rate for Latino men (79.6 percent) was
higher than that for non-Latino white men (75.8 percent) in the same year,
while Latinas had a lower rate (53.4 percent) than non-Latino white women
(59.1 percent).
The occupational distribution of the Latino population reflects both the
traditional background of the subgroups and the economic changes of later
decades. According to the Statistical Abstract, in 1996, Mexicans were mostly
operators, fabricators, and laborers (24.5 percent); they also had the highest
percentage of workers in farming, forestry, and fishing among all the other
subgroups (8.4 percent). Cubans had the highest proportion in managerial
489
and professional occupations (21.7 percent) as well as in technical, sales,

and administrative support positions (32.7 percent). The advances made by
Puerto Ricans were evidenced by the fact that their concentration in the lat-
ter positions (32.1 percent) and in managerial and professional occupations
(19 percent) closely approximated those of the Cubans. However, this ad-
vance may be more apparent than real because of changes in the occupa-
tional structure that have reduced the availability of lower-level, high-paying
blue-collar occupations in favor of low-paying white-collar occupations.
Comparison with Non-Latino Whites A comparison of the occupa-

tional distribution of Latinos with that of non-Latino whites reveals that the
former are concentrated in lower-level occupations and that white men are
concentrated in managerial and professional occupations. During the late
1980’s, Mexican American men were concentrated in skilled and semiskilled
blue-collar jobs, although they were advancing to better jobs; Puerto Rican
men were in service and lower-level white-collar jobs. Latinas were more likely
than white or black women to be semiskilled manual workers.
Regarding the evolution of Latino earnings and incomes, Gregory De-
Freitas reports that in 1949, U.S.-born men of Mexican and Puerto Rican an-
cestry had incomes that were 55 percent and 76 percent, respectively, of the
white non-Latino level. During the 1960’s, both groups improved relative to
whites; but during the 1970’s, the Puerto Ricans experienced a decline and
the Mexicans remained at the same level. Latinos generally suffered de-
A Cuban architect working in Miami during the mid-1960’s. Among Latino immigrants, Cubans have
had a disproportionately strong representation in the professions. (Library of Congress)
490
creases in income during the 1970’s. Median Latino incomes declined in ab-
solute and relative terms after the 1970’s. By 1987, Latino income was still
almost 9 percent lower in real terms than it had been in 1973 and, when com-
pared with the income of non-Latino whites, even lower than it had been fif-
teen years earlier.
According to U.S. government statistics, the median income of Latino
households, at constant 1995 dollars, was $25,278 in 1980; it rose later to
$26,037 in 1990 but fell to $22,860 in 1995. It was 64 percent of the white non-
Latino median income, which in 1995 was $35,766, and practically equal to
that of African Americans, which stood that year at $22,393.
Since the 1950’s, Latinos have made progress in occupational mobility and
earning levels, especially during periods of economic expansion. Cuban
Americans are nearly equal with non-Latino whites in educational and eco-
nomic achievement; Mexican Americans and Puerto Ricans, however, are still
the most disadvantaged.
Unemployment Unemployment has been a long-term problem for Latinos.

Their actual unemployment rates reflect structural factors such as business-
cycle fluctuations, industrial restructuring, and changes in demand as well as
individual characteristics such as educational level and previous work experi-
ence. As indicated in the Statistical Abstract of the United States (1997), in 1980,
the total unemployment rate was 7.1 percent, while it was 10.1 percent for La-
tinos. By 1992, these rates had risen to 7.5 and 11.6 percent, respectively. In
1996, both had decreased; the total rate stood at 5.4 percent and the Latino
rate at 8.9 percent.
The rates, however, vary among the national-origin subgroups. Cuban
Americans’ unemployment rates have been almost as low as those of non-
Latino whites, largely because of their above-average educational levels and
accumulated work experience. By contrast, Mexican Americans and Puerto
Ricans have generally experienced above-average unemployment. Puerto Ri-
cans’ unemployment rates are usually twice as high as those of Cuban Ameri-
cans. Some scholars claim that Puerto Ricans’ history of “circular migration”
(their frequent returns to the island) tends to destabilize their employment.
Factors That Influence the Latino Labor Market Education is one

of the main factors that affect the labor market situation for Latinos. De-
Freitas, after analyzing the trends in earnings of Latinos and non-Latinos
from 1949 to 1979, found that those Latinos who were better educated were
able to approximate the earnings of non-Latino whites during the 1960’s.
Limited English ability is another relevant factor. Several empirical studies
carried out during the 1980’s found that language limitations could account
for up to one-third of wage differentials between Latino and non-Latino
white men. Other research has established that Puerto Rican and Cuban
American men, who are concentrated in urban areas, tend to have lower par-
ticipation rates in the labor force than men from the same national-origin
491
Mexican migrant worker harvesting sugar beets. (Library of Congress)
subgroups with better English language skills. Mexican Americans, who are
mainly operators, fabricators, laborers, and agricultural workers, have higher
participation rates because those occupations do not require a good com-
mand of English.
Empirical studies have tried to establish the extent of discrimination suf-
fered by Latinos in the labor market. According to the findings of a major
study undertaken by the General Accounting Office (1990) to evaluate the ef-
fects of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, discrimination in
hiring is practiced against “foreign-looking” or “foreign-sounding” applicants.
In particular, an audit carried out as part of the study found that Hispanic job
seekers were more likely than similarly qualified Anglos to be unfavorably
treated and less likely to receive interviews and job offers. Consequently, dis-
crimination could partially account for the higher Latino unemployment
rates.
Self-employment may be a way to escape unemployment, low wages, and
obstacles to promotion. However, capital is required to start a business, and
many poorer Latinos find it difficult to accumulate savings and are not likely
to receive loans from credit institutions. Cuban Americans, who have a higher
status background, have opened many small businesses, creating an “ethnic
enclave” of Latino businesses in Miami. The benefits of this type of social and
economic arrangement have been highly debated. Some contend that it is an
avenue of economic mobility for new immigrants; others argue that it may
492
hinder their assimilation into the larger society. However, given the small pro-
portion of self-employed Latinos and the level of their earnings, it is not likely
that this type of employment will soon become a prevalent means to reduce
inequality for Latinos in the labor market.
Graciela Bardallo-Vivero
Further Reading
tition for Jobs. New York: Garland, 2000. Examination of Latino employ-
ment in major urban centers.
Karas, Jennifer. Bridges and Barriers: Earnings and Occupational Attainment Among
Immigrants. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2002.
Knouse, Stephen B., P. Rosenfeld, and A. L. Culbertson, eds. Hispanics in the
Workplace. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1992. Collection of
scholarly studies of Latino employment issues.
Sarmiento, Socorro Torres. Making Ends Meet: Income-Generating Strategies
Among Mexican Immigrants. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2002.
Study of Latino employment issues.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Collection of essays on ur-
ban aspects of immigration in the United States, particularly race relations
and employment.
See also Bracero program; Chicano movement; Latinos; Latinos and fam-
ily customs; Mexican deportations during the Depression; Operation Wet-
back; Undocumented workers.
493
Latinos and family customs

Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Families and marriage; Labor; La-
tino immigrants
Significance: Although new roles and traditions are emerging within Latino
families, many Latinos continue to find satisfaction in following traditional
practices, viewing the family as a source of stability, protection, and sup-
port throughout persons’ lifetimes.
Because the historical and cultural experiences of the various groups known
collectively as “Latinos” differ widely, it is impossible to discuss a monolithic
tradition. There are no universal customs or lifestyles that can fully reflect La-
tino family life. Nevertheless, there is a strong tradition among Latinos of em-
phasizing the importance of family, kin, and neighborhood ties.
As with other ethnic and cultural groups, the Latino family functions as a
conduit for transmitting social skills and cultural values from one generation
to the next. It is important to remember that cultural traditions based on an-
cestral customs and national origins exert long-lasting influence on Latino
family structure and behavior. Family life among Mexican Americans is not
identical to that found among Puerto Ricans, Cuban Americans, or Domini-
can Americans, in part because of such factors as variations in economic and
social status; persons’ urban versus rural origins; distinctions between profes-
sionals, skilled laborers, and unskilled laborers; and differences between per-
sons with high literacy skills and levels of education and those with limited lit-
eracy and education. Although members within a particular Latino extended
family may share the same cultural origins, the length of time each member
has lived in the United States is often very different. Individual family mem-
bers may not share the same beliefs about what is important in life. Latino
families often find themselves forging delicate compromises when their tradi-
tional values clash with mainstream American attitudes.
L A FAMILIA There are probably more similarities than differences between

the various Latino groups when it comes to basic family characteristics and
values. The concept of la familia is central to Latino identity, since individuals
are considered to be representatives or symbols of the families who raise
them. The actions of family members are commonly viewed as bringing
honor or shame to the entire family, not solely to individual members.
The extended Latino family includes all the members of the nuclear family
plus aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, and even godparents. Whether ex-
tended family members are related by blood, marriage, or close friendship,
they play an important role in improving the economic status of the family.
The ability to call upon extended family members for assistance allows for
greater flexibility in sharing caregiving responsibilities, giving mothers and
494
younger women the opportunity to add to their families’ economic resources

by working outside the home.
Eating together is an activity that gives family members an opportunity to
strengthen their ties to one another, to share news, and to discuss important
family decisions. In preparing family meals, many Latinos include traditional
foods and use recipes that have been handed down from generation to gener-
ation. Extended family members often participate in these family meals.
Family Loyalty and Size Because Latinos have traditionally defined them-
selves in terms of their obligations to their families, they are willing to set
aside other demands in order to fulfill such obligations. If a close family mem-
ber or relative needs assistance of some kind—whether financial, physical, or
emotional—most Latinos consider that such needs outweigh their own per-
sonal desires and plans. It is not uncommon for Latinos to take time off from
work or school if another family member needs help when visiting a doctor,
registering a car, or consulting a lawyer. Especially among immigrant families,
Latino children are expected to serve as translators for their Spanish-speaking
elders and facilitate families’ contact with the broader English-speaking so-
ciety.
Although large Latino families are not as common as they once were, Lati-
nos continue to outpace other American ethnic groups in terms of birth rates
and family size. Although changing attitudes toward divorce and family plan-
ning methods have had some effect on family size, Latinos have historically
Latino family on the porch of their Los Angeles home during the early 1970’s. The father in this fam-
ily had to work two jobs to support his large family. (Library of Congress)
495
placed great value on having large families. Their reverence for traditional
ways has made many Latinos reluctant to have smaller families with fewer chil-
dren. Many Latinos face a conflict of cultural values when making the deci-
sion to have children, since their cultural tradition of placing family responsi-
bilities first contradicts the tradition of individualism that is encouraged by
mainstream American society. Even the most enduring reasons given for hav-
ing children, such as a desire to carry on the family name or to ensure that
family members will be cared for in old age, reflect a mixture of selflessness
and self-interest.
According to the 1990 U.S. Census, nearly 70 percent of all Hispanic fami-
lies were headed by married couples. While 76 percent of Cuban American
and 73 percent of Mexican American and South American families were
headed by married couples, this was the case for only 56 percent of Puerto
Rican and 50 percent of Dominican American families. Central American
families had the highest percentage of families headed by fathers whose
wives were absent (14 percent), while families headed by women were highest
among Dominican Americans (41 percent) and Puerto Ricans (36 percent).
Figures from 1990 show that 65 percent of Hispanic families had children un-
der the age of eighteen as compared to 48 percent for all American families.
The Bureau of the Census has estimated that the Hispanic population will
increase to 88 million (a fourfold increase over the 1990 population) and will
represent 60 percent of the U.S. population by the middle of the twenty-first
century. Such growth is expected to occur because of a natural increase
within Hispanic families already living in the United States rather than be-
cause of a rise in immigration. This projected growth will widen the median
age gap between the Hispanic and non-Hispanic white populations. Accord-
ing to the 1990 census, the median age of Hispanics was 25.4 years, whereas
non-Hispanic whites’ median age was 34.8 years. By the middle of the twenty-
first century the median ages are projected to reach 32.1 years and 54.2 years,
respectively.
Traditional Family Roles Certain cultural expectations persist among

Latinos regarding appropriate roles for family members. It is expected that
Latino parents will make whatever personal sacrifices are necessary to im-
prove the welfare of and opportunities available to their children. Such de-
mands are intergenerational, since young adults are expected to make simi-
lar sacrifices to assist their elderly relatives and parents, as well as younger
siblings. The demand for self-sacrifice is accompanied by an expectation that
family members will maintain their pride and dignity. Among Latinos, per-
sons’ self-worth and self-respect are defined in terms of how their behavior
reflects their upbringing and reinforces the community’s regard for their
family. It is often considered disrespectful and ungrateful to place individual
needs above the welfare of the family as a whole, and betraying the family’s es-
teem and public image is considered more shameful than to bring shame
upon oneself.
496
Historically, Latinos have vested men with ultimate authority to make fam-
ily decisions. The patriarchal structure that resulted was based on the as-
sumed superiority of men, producing a cultural tradition known as machismo.
While defining desired traits and behaviors for Latino men as providing lead-
ership, protection, and economic security for the family, machismo also dic-
tated reciprocal traits and behaviors for Latina women. Women were ex-
pected to respect male authority, to take responsibility for domestic duties,
and to honor the family reputation by seeking social relationships and recre-
ation among friends and extended family members.
Despite the negative characteristics often associated with the concept of
machismo, it arose from the expectation that men earned respect within the
Latino community by exercising their authority in the family in a just and fair
manner. As traditional stereotypes have given way to a more accurate view of
family structure and relationships, Latinos have acknowledged the equally
important role that women have played in shaping family life and making im-
portant decisions.
Latino families encourage children to have respect for authority. Children
are expected to express reverence toward their elders, including grandpar-
ents and other aging relatives. Obedience is valued, yet discipline within the
family is increasingly affected by parental absence. Although they can call
upon members of their extended family, many Latino parents who work mul-
tiple jobs to earn enough money to support their children find it difficult to
ensure that their children are always under adult supervision.
Family Naming Customs and Celebrations Many Latino families main-

tain the custom of recognizing persons’ heritage by using the surnames of
both parents. In Spanish, this combination of surnames is called el nombre
completo, or “full name.” Persons’ first and middle names are followed by their
father’s and mother’s first surnames. Although most Latino families have as-
similated the mainstream American custom of adopting one surname for le-
gal purposes, many Latinos identify themselves to each other by their full
names as a sign of respect for their kinship ties and cultural origins.
Baptism is an important event in many Latino families. Among Roman
Catholic Latinos, this ceremony celebrates the birth of infants and welcomes
them as part of the church family. Godparents, or padrinos, are chosen from
among parents’ close relatives or family friends to help care for children and
serve as role models in guiding them to adulthood. Other family events with
religious dimensions include childrens’ first Communion and young girls’
quinceañera (part of the fifteenth birthday celebration marking the end of
childhood and the beginning of womanhood). Special family traditions mark
the observance of saints’ and holy days, including Semana Santa (Holy Week
before Easter) and Navidad (Christmas). The Christmas procession known as
Las Posadas revolves around the family theme of Joseph and Mary’s search for
lodging in Bethlehem before the birth of Jesus.
Some Latinos observe other family-related holidays or celebrations. Mexi-
497
can Americans observe Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) to honor de-
ceased relatives. There are also family traditions associated with patriotic holi-
days celebrated in Latinos’ countries of origin—particularly Dieciseis for
Mexican Americans, Día de la Raza for Puerto Ricans and Dominican Ameri-
cans, and Independence Day for Cuban Americans.
Blending the Old and the New Although the child-centered focus of la
familia persists, many Latino parents share family responsibilities instead of
holding tightly to their traditional family roles. Latino men and Latina women
take advantage of educational and career opportunities, choosing to post-
pone marriage until later in life. When they marry, many husbands and wives
find it easier to share family responsibilities that were formerly defined either
as male or female. While families acknowledge that their members have indi-
vidual goals, many Latinos find comfort in honoring their attachment to
their families as a positive cultural attribute and reaffirm the tradition of pull-
ing together to provide mutual assistance in times of need. While such values
are hardly unique to Latino families, they do serve to reaffirm cultural roots
and ties within the Latino community.
Wendy Sacket
Further Reading
Acosta-Belén, Edna, and Barbara R. Sjostrom, eds. The Hispanic Experience in
the United States: Contemporary Issues and Perspectives. New York: Praeger,
1988. Collection of essays reflecting the research interests of sociologists
and cultural anthropologists who have explored issues relating to Latino
family life.
Carrasquillo, Angela L. Hispanic Children and Youth in the United States: A Re-
source Guide. New York: Garland, 1991. In addition to directing readers to
resource material on family life, language, education, health care, justice,
and other social issues, Carrasquillo offers a useful introduction to the his-
tory, culture, and diversity of Latino children.
ern immigrants from many nations, including Bolivia, Cuba, and Mexico
who relate poignant tales of adjusting to life in the United States.
Hoobler, Dorothy, and Thomas Hoobler. The Mexican American Family Album.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Focusing on the experiences of
Mexican Americans, the Hooblers have gathered a broad range of first-
person accounts—including personal recollections, diary entries, and let-
ters—to accompany the photographs that comprise this chronicle of fam-
ily life.
cludes chapters on Mexicans, Cubans, and Central Americans.
498
LAU V. NICHOLS
Shorris, Earl. Latinos: A Biography of the People. New York: W. W. Norton, 1992.
Drawing on extensive primary research as well as life portraits of his own
family and friends, Shorris offers a lively social history of various Latino
groups and their experiences in the United States.
Zambrana, Ruth E., ed. Understanding Latino Families: Scholarship, Policy and
Practice. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1995. Among the most
useful essays in this collection are “Variations, Combinations, and Evolu-
tions: Latino Families in the United States,” by Aida Hurtado; “The Study
of Latino Families,” by William A. Vega; and “Contemporary Issues in La-
tino Families,” by Douglas S. Massey, Ruth E. Zambrana, and Sally Alonzo
Bell.
See also Chicano movement; Latinos; Latinos and employment; Mexican

deportations during the Depression.
LAU V. NICHOLS
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court decision on bilingual education
Date: January 21, 1974

liberties; Court cases; Education
Significance: In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that public school
systems must provide bilingual education to limited-English-speaking stu-
dents.
In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that the Four-
teenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution forbade school systems from seg-
regating students into separate schools for only whites or African Americans.
The decision effectively overturned a previous Court ruling, in Plessy v. Fergu-
son (1896), that such facilities could be “separate but equal.” Instead of deseg-
regating, however, Southern school systems engaged in massive resistance to
the Court’s order during the next decade. Congress then passed the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited many types of discrimination. Title VI of
the law banned discrimination by recipients of federal financial assistance, in-
cluding school systems.
Chinese-Speaking Students In 1965, Congress adopted the Immigra-

tion and Nationality Act, under which larger numbers of Asian immigrants
arrived in the United States than ever before. Their non-English-speaking
499
LAU V. NICHOLS
children were enrolled in public schools. In the San Francisco Unified School
District, students were required to attend school until sixteen years of age,
but in 1967, 2,856 students could not adequately comprehend instruction in
English. Although 433 students were given supplemental courses in English
on a full-time basis and 633 on a part-time basis, the remaining 1,790 students
received no additional language instruction. Nevertheless, the state of Cali-
fornia required all students to graduate with proficiency in English and
permitted school districts to provide bilingual education, if needed. Except
for the 433 students in the full-time bilingual education program, Chinese-
speaking students were integrated in the same classrooms with English-
speaking students but lacked sufficient language ability to derive benefit
from the instruction. Of the 1,066 students taking bilingual courses, only 260
had bilingual teachers.
Some parents of the Chinese-speaking children, concerned that their chil-
dren would drop out of school and experience pressure to join criminal
youth gangs, launched protests. Various organizations formed in the Chinese
American community, which in turn conducted studies, issued proposals, cir-
culated leaflets, and tried to negotiate with the San Francisco Board of Educa-
tion. When the board refused to respond adequately, a suit was filed in fed-
eral district court in San Francisco on March 25, 1970. The plaintiffs were
Kinney Kinmon Lau and eleven other non-English-speaking students, mostly
U.S. citizens born of Chinese parents. The defendants were Alan H. Nichols,
president of the San Francisco Board of Education, the rest of the Board of
Education, and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
Findings and Rulings On May 25, 1970, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare issued the follow-
ing regulation pursuant to its responsibility to monitor Title VI compliance:
Where inability to speak and understand the English language excludes national-
origin minority group children from effective participation in the educational
program offered by a school district, the district must take affirmative steps to
rectify the language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to
these students.
OCR had sided with the Chinese-speaking students. One day later, the
court ruled that the school system was violating neither Title VI nor the Four-
teenth Amendment; instead, the plaintiffs were characterized as asking for
“special rights above those granted other children.” Lawyers representing the
Chinese Americans then appealed, this time supported by a friend-of-the-
court brief filed by the U.S. Department of Justice. On January 8, 1973, the
Court of Appeals also ruled adversely, stating that there was no duty “to rectify
appellants’ special deficiencies, as long as they provided these students with
access to the same educational system made available to all other students.”
The appeals court claimed that the children’s problems were “not the result
500
LAU V. NICHOLS
of law enacted by the state . . . but the result of deficiency created by them-
selves in failing to learn the English language.”
On June 12, 1973, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Oral argu-
ment was heard on December 10, 1973. On January 21, 1974, the Supreme
Court unanimously overturned the lower courts. Justice William O. Douglas
delivered the majority opinion, which included the memorable statement
that
There is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same fa-
cilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum; for students who do not under-
stand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education.
The Supreme Court returned the case to the district court so that the
school system could design a plan of language-needs assessments and pro-
grams for addressing those needs. In a concurring opinion, Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger and Justice Harry A. Blackmun observed that the number
of underserved non-English-speaking, particularly Chinese-speaking, students
was substantial in this case, but they would not order bilingual education for
“just a single child who speaks only German or Polish or Spanish or any lan-
guage other than English.”
The Supreme Court’s decision in Lau ultimately resulted in changes to en-
able Chinese-speaking students to obtain equal educational opportunity in
San Francisco’s public schools, although it was more than a year before such
changes began to be implemented. The greatest impact, however, has been
among Spanish-speaking students, members of the largest language minority
group in the United States.
Recognition of Bilingualism Subsequently, Congress passed the Equal

Educational Opportunities Act in 1974, a provision of which superseded Lau
by requiring “appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede
equal participation,” which a federal district court later applied to the need
for new methods to deal with speakers of “Black English” in Martin Luther
King, Jr., Elementary School Children v. Michigan Board of Education (1979). Also
in 1974, the Bilingual Education Act of 1968 was amended to provide more
federal funds for second-language instruction so that school districts could
be brought into compliance with Lau. Bilingualism was further recognized
when Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1975, which established guide-
lines for providing ballots in the languages of certain minority groups.
In 1975, OCR established informal guidelines for four bilingual programs
that would enable school districts to come into compliance with the Supreme
Court ruling. The main requirement was first to test students to determine
language proficiency. Students with no English proficiency at all were to be
exposed to bilingual/bicultural programs or transitional bilingual education
programs; secondary schools also had the option of providing “English as a
second language” or “high intensive language training” programs. If a stu-
501
LAU V. NICHOLS
dent had some familiarity with English, these four programs would be required
only if testing revealed that the student had low achievement test scores.
Because the OCR guidelines were not published in the Federal Register for
public comment and later modification, they were challenged on September
29, 1978, in the federal district court of Alaska (Northwest Arctic School District v.
Califano). The case was settled by a consent decree in 1980, when the federal
agency agreed to publish a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking”; however, soon
after Ronald Reagan took office as president, that notice was withdrawn. By
1985, a manual to identify types of language discrimination was compiled to
supersede the 1975 guidelines, but it also was not published in the Federal Reg-
ister for public comment. Meanwhile, methods for educating limited-English-
speaking students evolved beyond the OCR’s original conceptions, and fur-
ther litigation followed. In 1981, a U.S. circuit court ruled in Castañeda v.
Pickard that bilingual educational programs are lawful when they satisfy three
tests: (1) the program is recognized by professionals as sound in educational
theory; (2) the program is designed to implement that theory; and (3) the
program actually results in overcoming language barriers.
During the presidency of Ronald Reagan, civil rights monitoring focused
more on “reverse discrimination” than on violations of equal educational op-
portunities. Congressional hearings were held to goad OCR into action. Al-
though in 1991 OCR’s top priority was equal educational opportunities for
national-origin minority and Native American students with limited-English
proficiency (LEP) or non-English proficiency (NEP), results were difficult to
discern, and a movement to make English the official language of the United
States (the “English-only” movement) threatened to overturn Lau and re-
lated legislation. Moreover, by the late 1990’s the controversy over bilingual
education had revived, as many teachers, parents, policymakers, and legisla-
tors—including a significant number of Latinos—acknowledged the disap-
pointing results of bilingual programs and sought solutions through legisla-
tion. In 1998, for example, California voted to curtail bilingual education by
passing Proposition 227. Such measures were perceived as appropriate means
of forcing quick English-language acquisition by some, but as simplistic and
counterproductive by others.
Michael Haas
Further Reading
Biegel, Stuart. “The Parameters of the Bilingual Education Debate in Califor-
nia Twenty Years After Lau v. Nichols.” Chicano-Latino Law Review 14 (Win-
ter, 1994): 48-60. The status of Lau in light of the 1990’s English-only move-
ment.
Brittain, Carmina. Transnational Messages: Experiences of Chinese and Mexican
Immigrants in American Schools. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2002.
Broad study of the special problems faced by immigrants in American pub-
lic schools.
502
League of United Latin American Citizens
Bull, Barry L., Royal T. Fruehling, and Virgie Chattergy. The Ethics of Multicul-
tural and Bilingual Education. New York: Teachers College Press, 1992. Con-
trasts how liberal, democratic, and communitarian approaches to educa-
tion relate to bilingual and multicultural education.
Lee, Stacey J. Up Against Whiteness: Race, School, and Immigrant Youth. New York:
Teachers College Press, 2005. Study of cultural biases in education that fo-
cuses on the special problems of immigrant schoolchildren.
Newman, Terri Lunn. “Proposal: Bilingual Education Guidelines for the
Courts and the Schools.” Emory Law Journal 33 (Spring, 1984): 577-629. Le-
gal requirements of Lau presented as guidelines for school systems in es-
tablishing bilingual programs.
Orlando, Carlos J., and Virginia P. Collier. Bilingual and ESL Classrooms:
Teaching in Multicultural Contexts. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985. Discusses
the need for bilingual education, alternative approaches available, and re-
sources required.
United States Commission on Civil Rights. A Better Chance to Learn: Bilingual-
Bicultural Education. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1975. Assesses the national
impact of Lau; contains the text of the Supreme Court decision and re-
lated documents.
Wang, L. Ling-chi. “Lau v. Nichols: History of Struggle for Equal and Quality
Education.” In Asian-Americans: Social and Psychological Perspectives, edited
by Russell Endo, Stanley Sue, and Nathaniel N. Wagner. Palo Alto, Calif.:
Science & Behavior Books, 1980. Describes how the Lau case was pursued,
especially the resistance to implementation.
See also Bilingual education; Bilingual Education Act of 1968; English-

only and official English movements; Proposition 227.
League of United Latin

American Citizens
Identification: Latino advocacy organization
Place: Corpus Christi, Texas
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Latino immigrants; Mexican

immigrants
Significance: One of the oldest Hispanic advocacy organizations in the

United States, the League of United Latin American Citizens has always
concerned itself with the rights of Mexican immigrants.
503
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) was formed in or-
der to unite all Latin American organizations under one title. In 1927, the
main Latin American groups were the Sons of America, the Knights of Amer-
ica, and the League of Latin American Citizens, and there were other less
well-known groups. The Sons of America had councils in Sommerset, Pear-
sall, Corpus Christi, and San Antonio, Texas; the Knights of America had a
council in San Antonio; the League of Latin American Citizens had councils
in Harlingen, Brownsville, Laredo, Peñitas, La Grulla, McAllen, and Gulf,
Texas.
As more Anglo-Americans moved into Texas during the early nineteenth
century, persons of Spanish or Mexican descent experienced open discrimi-
nation and segregation that placed them in the position of second-class citi-
zens. They had been under the rule of six different countries before Texas en-
tered the union in 1845. Most continued to live and work as they always had,
without being assertive about their rights. As time progressed, many Hispan-
ics found that prejudice and discrimination were becoming less tolerable.
Groups began to form to give more impact to requests that these practices
cease. The Sons of America Council No. 4 in Corpus Christi, led by Ben Garza,
originated a unification plan, believing that if all Hispanic organizations
would regroup into one strong, unified, and vocal organization, more atten-
tion would be brought to the plight of those who were being discriminated
against.
On August 14, 1927, delegates from the Sons of America, the Knights of
America, and smaller groups met in Harlingen, Texas, to form LULAC. The
resolution that was presented was adopted by those in the meeting. It was ex-
pected that the leaders of the major groups—Alonso Perales, Luz Saenz, José
Canales, and Juan Lozano of the Rio Grande Valley of south Texas— would be
invited by the president general of the Sons of America to begin the unifica-
tion process. In response to concerns about the merger expressed by some
members, Council No. 4 of the Sons of America drafted an agreement be-
tween itself and the Knights of America to unite. These two groups waited a
year for the merger to be completed. Perales, president general of the Latin
American League, stayed in close contact with Garza to maintain interest in
the merger among the three main groups. However, the president general of
the Sons of America never called the convention. After the long wait, Council
No. 4 withdrew from the Sons of America on February 7, 1929. Participants at
this meeting again voted to have a general convention for the purpose of uni-
fication. On February 17, 1929, invitations were sent to all the groups to meet
in Corpus Christi, Texas, to vote on the merger.
Along with interested members of the Hispanic groups, Douglas Weeks, a
professor at the University of Texas, attended not only to study the merger
but also to open the convention as a nonaligned attendee. Garza was elected
chairman pro tem. His popularity as an energetic and fair civic leader made
him a good spokesperson for the new group. The assembly had to choose a
chairman, plan a single constitution, and select a name that would encom-
504
pass the goals of the previously separate groups. The committee chosen to se-
lect a name included Juan Solis and Mauro Machado of the Knights of Amer-
ica, Perales and Canales of the Latin American League, E. N. Marin and A. de
Luna of Corpus Christi, and Fortunio Treviño of Alice, Texas. Machado, of
the Knights of America, proposed “United Latin American Citizens.” This
was amended to read “League of United Latin American Citizens,” which was
seconded by Canales. On February 17, 1929, LULAC formally came into be-
ing at Corpus Christi, Texas.
The naming committee undertook other proposals before coming back to
the general convention. Canales proposed a motto, “All for One and One for
All,” as a reminder of their purpose in uniting and as a basis for their future
activities. They set some basic rules to guide the league until the constitu-
tional convention could be held. This meeting was called for May 18 and 19,
1929, with an executive committee made up of Garza, M. C. González as sec-
retary, and Canales and Saenz as members at large. On May 18, the first meet-
ing under the new title was called. The constitution proposed by Canales was
adopted, and new officers were elected. The officers were Garza, president
general; González, vice president general; de Luna, secretary general; and
Louis C. Wilmot of Corpus Christi, treasurer general. George Washington’s
prayer was adopted from the ritual of the Sons of America, and the U.S. flag
was adopted as the group’s official flag. Now, in union, the new group could
work to remove the injustices that had been building for many years. LULAC
was chartered in 1931 under the laws of the state of Texas and later in New
Mexico, Arizona, California, and Colorado, as other councils were formed.
LULAC began issuing LULAC Notes, but in August, 1931, the first issue of
LULAC News was published. During the 1990’s, this magazine carried the sub-
title The Magazine for Today’s Latino.
Evolution In the formative years, auxiliaries were started by women whose

husbands were active LULAC members. In August, 1987, LULAC amended
its constitution to admit women into the organization. Between 1937 and
1938, junior LULAC councils were formed under the sponsorship of adult
councils. In 1940, LULAC councils peaked, but with the beginning of World
War II, the councils weakened with the departure of the men to military ser-
vice. In 1945 and 1946, LULAC began to make great strides as educated,
trained men returned from the service. Prestigious positions were filled by
Hispanics and discrimination lessened. Non-Hispanics were joining, and
LULAC was moving toward its objectives.
When the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s began, other Hispanic
groups with a more militant response to discrimination began to form.
Leaders such as the charismatic preacher, Reies López Tijerina in New Mex-
ico and Rodolfo Gonzáles in Denver marched in protest of the treatment His-
panics were receiving. César Chávez led farm groups in California on peace-
ful marches, which frequently erupted into violent confrontations as the
number of militant members rose. LULAC did not totally support all these
505
movements. It preferred mediation to resolve serious disagreements and ed-

ucation for all Hispanics as better ways of blending peacefully into the U.S.
mainstream.
LULAC has evolved to stress education. Parents are encouraged to prepare
their children well to enter school. English is encouraged as the primary lan-
guage, Spanish as the second language. As students mature, they are encour-
aged to finish high school and enter college. For those who aspire to higher
learning, LULAC sponsors many scholarships; it also offers other forms of fi-
nancial aid and counseling. LULAC Education Centers are located in sixty
cities in seventeen states to provide this help. With corporate and federal aid,
these centers have made it possible for disadvantaged Hispanic American
youth to become productive members of their American communities.
Among its other pursuits, LULAC has used the courts to advance the rights
of Hispanics. In 1987, for example, LULAC filed a class-action suit against the
federal Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to force the INS to
process amnesty applicants of immigrants more expeditiously. When League
of United Latin American Citizens v. Immigration and Naturalization Service was
settled in the organization’s favor in 2003, more than 100,000 immigrants
were able to become permanent legal residents in the United States.
Norma Crews
Further Reading
De la Garza, Rodolfo O., ed. Ignored Voices: Public Opinion Polls and the Latino
Community. Austin: Center for Mexican American Studies, University of
Texas at Austin Press, 1987. Argues that the opinions of Hispanic people
were virtually ignored, politically and otherwise, except in heavily His-
panic communities.
Garcia, F. Chris, ed. Latinos and the Political System. Notre Dame, Ind.: Univer-
sity of Notre Dame Press, 1988. Discusses some of the political problems
that prompted the formation of organizations such as LULAC.
Garcia, Mario T. Mexican-Americans: Leadership, Ideology, and Identity, 1930-
1960. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1989. A thorough treatise
on Hispanic assimilation into the mainstream of U.S. business and com-
munity.
Jonas, Susanne, and Suzanne Dod Thomas, eds. Immigration: A Civil Rights Is-
sue for the Americas. Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1999. General
study of civil rights issues arising in immigrant communities.
Mirande, Alfredo. The Chicano Experience: An Alternative Perspective. Notre
Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1985. A view into the life of
the less accepted Hispanic, the Chicano. Gives information on La Raza, a
more militant group representing Hispanics of the 1960’s and 1970’s.
Shorris, Earl. Latinos: A Biography of the People. New York: W. W. Norton, 1992.
A collection of information on Hispanics in the United States, and a gen-
eral overview of those Hispanics who immigrated and settled during the
twentieth century.
506
Literature
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Bracero program; Chicano movement; Lati-
nos; Latinos and employment; Mexican American Legal Defense and Educa-
tion Fund; Mexican deportations during the Depression; Undocumented
workers.
Literature
Immigration issues: African Americans; European immigrants; Literature
Significance: Much North American literature has been written by or about

immigrants. Additionally, a significant number of North American authors
have emigrated to other continents and written about their adopted homes.
Native Americans constitute only a small percentage of the population of

North America, so it can be argued that virtually all North American litera-
ture has been written by immigrants from other continents. Chroniclers of
the founding of the English colonies during the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries were John White, John Smith, and William Bradford. The best col-
lection is that of Richard Hakluyt, titled Divers Voyages Touching the Discovery of
America (1582). The Puritans Anne Bradstreet and Edward Taylor came in the
seventeenth century from England to New England, where both wrote po-
etry. Another poet, Phillis Wheatley, was taken as a slave to Boston from Africa
in the eighteenth century. England was denounced before the Revolutionary
War by native son Thomas Paine, an immigrant to Virginia.
There were some voyage narratives written in French also. Jesuit missionar-
ies to North America in the seventeenth century wrote reports in French that
have come to be known as the Jesuit relations. These missionaries were great
scholars and produced dictionaries and religious literature in various Native
American languages. In addition, the seventeenth century produced voyage
narratives in Dutch and Swedish.
Michel-Guillaume-Jean de Crèvecœur left Normandy for New York, where
as J. Hector St. John he wrote Letters from an American Farmer (1782) about the
metamorphosis of a Frenchman into an American. Although Crèvecœur con-
trasted favorably freedom in America with oppression in Europe, his experi-
ence of that reality differed greatly from the American Dream. During the
Revolutionary War, for refusing to take sides, he lost his farm, was impris-
oned, and fled for England. On his return, he found that his farm was ruined,
his wife dead, and his children missing. His book, however, recounts the
promise of a nation in which such disturbances would not be the norm. The
book remains as the tale of what America has always meant to immigrants.
Upton Sinclair wrote The Jungle (1906) about Polish immigrants working
in Chicago’s meatpacking plants. With its depiction of the immigrants’
507
Literature
squalid living and working condi-

tions, Sinclair’s novel fits squarely
into the tradition of naturalism.
Willa Cather wrote about Swedish
immigrants in Nebraska in O Pio-
neers! (1913) and about Bohemian
immigrants to the same prairie in
My Ántonia (1918). She also wrote
about French missionaries in New
Mexico in Death Comes for the Arch-
bishop (1927). O. E. Rölvaag’s I de
dage (1924) and Riket grundlœgges
(1925, translated together as Giants
in the Earth: A Saga of the Prairie,
1927) are about Norwegian immi-
grants to the Dakotas. Kate Chopin
wrote about the Creole culture in
New Orleans in her novel The Awak-
Upton Sinclair, author of The Jungle. (Library of ening (1899) and in her short sto-
Congress) ries.
Internal Migrations Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s long poem Evan-

geline (1847) is about the migration of the French Canadians from Nova Sco-
tia to Louisiana after they were expelled from their homeland, Acadia, by the
British in the eighteenth century. The Harlem Renaissance was a literary and
musical movement instigated by African Americans who had migrated from
the southern United States to New York to find employment during and after
World War I. The Harlem Renaissance also attracted many immigrants of Af-
rican heritage from the West Indies. One such immigrant was the poet
Claude McKay, whose British education in his native Jamaica resulted in a for-
mal poetic style that was distinctive from the innovative jazz rhythms of
Langston Hughes, an African American poet who migrated to New York dur-
ing the Harlem Renaissance.
Another Jamaican who went to New York during the Harlem Renaissance
was Marcus Garvey, who became leader of a movement that proposed to take
all black people in North America and the West Indies back to Africa. Garvey
is fictionalized in Ralph Ellison’s novel Invisible Man (1952).
John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath (1939) is about people who are made
to feel like immigrants within their own country during the Great Depres-
sion. When drought results in agricultural disaster and widespread foreclo-
sure in Oklahoma, the farmers must leave to find work as migrant workers in
California. After the Civil Rights movement in the United States during the
1960’s, American literature became an amalgam of books by and about immi-
grants from continents other than Europe. Many of the authors of these
books were born in the United States, but their parents’ or grandparents’
508
Literature
tales of immigration form the basis for much of this literature. Maxine Hong
Kingston’s The Woman Warrior (1976) and Amy Tan’s The Joy Luck Club (1989)
are classics of Asian American literature. Sandra Cisneros and Ana Castillo
are notable voices of Latin American culture, as are Rudolfo Anaya and Ro-
lando Hinojosa.
Emigrants from North America Many North American writers have, for
various reasons, felt compelled to venture abroad. Some have traveled to seek
adventure and cultures different from that of North America. Many have trav-
eled to Europe in order to experience the culture that has most influenced
North American literature. Others have traveled to escape prejudice and lack
of opportunity.
During the early nineteenth century, Washington Irving was the first U.S.
diplomatic officer stationed in Spain. The Alhambra (1832) is a collection of
stories inspired by his life in Spain. Irving also wrote A History of New York from
the Beginning of the World to the End of the Dutch Dynasty, by Diedrich Knickerbocker
(1809) about Dutch immigrants in New York. Longfellow traveled in Europe,
where his study of languages and literature was preparation for his position as
the first professor of Romance languages at Harvard.
John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath was inspired by the large-scale internal migrations of
the Great Depression of the 1930’s, when Dust Bowl conditions in Oklahoma drove many people
west in search of work. (Library of Congress)
509
Literature
In 1867, Mark Twain toured Europe and the Holy Land and sent back jour-
nalistic accounts of his travels to a California newspaper. Later incorporated
into The Innocents Abroad (1869)—the best-selling travel book of the nine-
teenth century—these accounts reflect Twain’s opinion that Europe’s artistic
traditions were stifling. In the work, Twain states his preference for the artis-
tic freedom afforded him in North America, where there was no preexisting
tradition to which he must conform.
Other North American authors have differed with Twain. During the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Henry James wrote many of his
novels and short stories about Great Britain and Europe; James found the ten-
sions of Europe’s class system engrossing. Also during the early twentieth cen-
tury, Ezra Pound, who was born in Idaho, found Europe a necessary aesthetic
stimulus for writing poetry. Pound was particularly fond of Italian culture, es-
pecially opera, as is evident in his Cantos (1970). Pound aligned himself politi-
cally with Benito Mussolini, Italy’s Fascist dictator, for which he was charged
with treason at the end of World War II. T. S. Eliot was another North Ameri-
can poet whose attraction for the Old World was aesthetic and political. Born
in St. Louis and educated at Harvard, Eliot became a British subject, as the
novelist Henry James had done earlier.
Pound and Eliot were part of the “lost generation,” a group of American
writers who, in the aftermath of World War I, found themselves emotionally
and culturally adrift. The group included F. Scott Fitzgerald, Hart Crane,
John Dos Passos, and Ernest Hemingway. Hemingway, for one, set most of his
greatest novels in Europe, with American protagonists who find themselves
unmoored in events large and small. Fitzgerald was less influenced artistically
by his time abroad than the other members of the lost generation, although
his novel Tender Is the Night (1934) has a French setting. The Canadian writer
Morley Callaghan was one of the lost generation. He and Hemingway met
while both wrote for the Toronto Star, and they were in Paris together.
Many African Americans have emigrated to Europe in order to enjoy
greater personal and artistic freedom than they experienced in the United
States. James Baldwin and Richard Wright are best known for their works
about the oppression suffered by African Americans in the United States, but
both lived in France for extended periods. Other African American writers
felt thwarted artistically in their own country because, as African Americans,
they were expected to write about racial issues and they could not be appreci-
ated on strictly aesthetic grounds. Chester Himes, who had great difficulty
getting published in the United States, emigrated to France to write detective
novels, and Frank Yerby left for Europe to write historical novels.
Douglas Edward LaPrade
Further Reading
Alba, Richard D. Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America. New Ha-
ven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1990. Cites the decline of national origin
510
Literature
as a basis for social division among European Americans and the mainte-
nance of the line between European and non-European Americans in so-
cial division.
wick, N.J.: Transaction, 2005. Collection of essays on identity issues among
immigrants.
Boelhower, William Q. Through a Glass Darkly: Ethnic Semiosis in American Liter-
ature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. Adopts the stance that liter-
ature by minorities and immigrants should be assimilated into mainstream
American literature.
Cheung, King-Kok, and Stan Yogi, comps. Asian American Literature: An Anno-
tated Bibliography. New York: Modern Language Association of America,
1988. Focuses mostly on primary sources, which are divided into Chinese
American, Japanese American, Filipino American, and so on.
United States.
American Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Debunks many widely held
myths about the immigrant experience.
Fabre, Michel. From Harlem to Paris: Black American Writers in France, 1840-
1980. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1991. Includes discussions of
many notable African American writers.
Fender, Stephen. Sea Changes: British Emigration and American Literature. Cam-
bridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Analyzes reasons for
British emigration to America from colonial times until World War II.
Kim, Elaine H. Asian American Literature: An Introduction to the Writings and
Their Social Context. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1982. Distin-
guishes between Asian and Asian American identities, and between first
and second generation immigrants.
Lohuis, Elisabeth ten. Towards a Winning of the West: Novels by East European Jew-
ish Immigrants to America and Their American Offspring. [Leiden: s.n., 2003].
Difficult to find but potentially useful study of Jewish immigrant literature.
Lowery, Ruth McKoy. Immigrants in Children’s Literature. New York: P. Lang,
2000. Examination of the depictions of immigrants in children’s fiction
that focuses on seventeen novels.
Saldívar, Ramón. Chicano Narrative: The Dialectics of Difference. Madison: Uni-
versity of Wisconsin Press, 1990. Discusses works by José Antonio Villarreal,
Anaya, Hinojosa, and others.
Simone, Roberta. The Immigrant Experience in American Fiction: An Annotated
Bibliography. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1995. Arranges primary and
secondary sources alphabetically according to immigrant group, from Ar-
menian to Yugoslavian.
511
Little Havana
Sollors, Werner, and Maria Diedrich, eds. The Black Columbiad: Defining Mo-
ments in African American Literature and Culture. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1994. A collection of essays, most of which focus on the di-
aspora as the defining moment in African American identity.
Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. Cites literary sources to describe the Asian im-
migrant experience.
Wilentz, Gay. Binding Cultures: Black Women Writers in Africa and the Diaspora.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992. Discusses three novels by Af-
rican women and three by African American women.
See also Asian American literature; Chinese immigrants; European immi-

grant literature; Melting pot.
Little Havana
Identification: Cuban residential enclave
Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Ethnic enclaves; Latino immigrants
Significance: Originally a lightly populated enclave of Miami, Little Havana

grew into the largest center of Cuban immigrants in the United States, and
its residents became a major force in both Miami and Florida politics. In
2000, the U.S. Census found that nearly 60 percent of the residents of Mi-
ami were foreign born, with the overwhelming part of these people of Cu-
ban origin.
The term “Little Havana” was originally coined by the English-speaking com-
munity in Miami during the late 1920’s and early 1930’s to describe the small
enclave of Cubans that lived in the Eighth Street and Flagler Avenue area. Af-
ter the Cuban Revolution of 1959 led by Fidel Castro, a large number of Cu-
ban refugees arrived in Miami. They, and more than a half million Cubans
who arrived during the 1960’s, settled in the Little Havana area of Miami.
Though many Cuban immigrants have dispersed to other U.S. cities, the en-
clave of Little Havana has remained.
Little Havana encompasses an area of about four square miles. It is located
in the southwest portion of Miami, hence the Cuban name for the area,
Souwesera. Upon the arrival of the immigrants during the 1960’s, the area
took on a distinct Cuban flavor. Cuban businesses sprang up everywhere, es-
pecially on Eighth Street (also known as Calle Ocho). Most store signs were in
Spanish; later signs reading “English spoken here” were placed in many store-
512
Little Havana
Cuban immigrants playing chess in a public park in Little Havana. (Cuban Archives, Otto G. Rich-
ter Library, University of Miami)
fronts in an attempt to avoid alienating other Miami residents. However, any-

one living and doing business in Little Havana did not need to speak English.
The first wave of Cubans fleeing the 1959 revolution arrived with nothing
except the clothes on their backs and nearly empty suitcases. Because they
were often unfamiliar with the language or the culture, they tended to con-
gregate with fellow Cuban Americans, much as the Irish, Swedish, Norwe-
gians, and Italians had done during their mass migrations in the final third of
the nineteenth century.
The Cubans accepted almost any employment they could find, which cre-
ated racial conflict with other economically challenged groups in Miami, es-
pecially the African American community. The African American community
felt that the Cuban refugees were taking many of the jobs and positions to
which they aspired. Tensions ran high and finally boiled over with the Miami
riots of 1980. Although these riots were the direct result of a Hispanic police
officer being acquitted in the shooting of an African American, the underly-
ing cause was all the years of tension between the two communities.
As time passed, many of the residents of Little Havana, some of whom had
become prosperous, moved to suburbs such as Hialeah and Coral Gables and
other Florida cities. Though this lessened the tensions between Cuban Amer-
icans and other ethnic and racial groups in Miami, it created problems be-
tween the Cuban Americans and the white, European American populace.
The tensions were largely cultural: The white community resented the Cu-
bans’ use of Spanish, even among themselves, and attempted to legislate that
they use only English. Though the “English only” proponents failed, they are
513
Little Italies
likely to try again. Unlike other minorities or ethnic groups that migrated to
the United States, the Cuban community has sought to preserve its cultural
heritage more vigorously and openly. This in itself has created tensions with
the U.S. population as a whole.
Peter E. Carr
Further Reading
Bardach, Ann Louise. Cuba Confidential: Love and Vengeance in Miami and Ha-
vana. New York: Random House, 2002.
tition for Jobs. New York: Garland, 2000.
Rutgers University Press, 2000.
See also Chinatowns; Cuban immigrants; Cuban immigrants and African

Americans; Cuban refugee policy; Ethnic enclaves; Florida illegal-immigrant
suit; Generational acculturation; Little Italies; Little Tokyos.
Little Italies
Definition: Predominantly Italian ethnic enclaves in major cities
Immigration issues: Ethnic enclaves; European immigrants
Significance: The “Little Italies” that arose in major eastern cities during
the late nineteenth century tended to separate Italian immigrants from
mainstream American society, while allowing them to maintain their ways
of life, eating familiar foods, speaking their native language, and maintain-
ing their close-knit family organization and religious practices.
Millions of people from 1880 to 1930 came to the United States with the hope
of finding a life better than the one they had left in their country of origin.
The U.S. Census indicates that during this fifty-year period more than four
million Italians (mostly from poor backgrounds) migrated to U.S. cities such
as New York City, Boston, Philadelphia, and Chicago. In these cities, the Ital-
ian immigrants moved to areas that contained other Italians, specifically their
paesani, or people from the same village in Italy. Italian communities known
as Little Italies developed as an outcome of this migration.
In The Italian Americans (1970), Joseph Lopreato shows how Little Italies
shielded Italian immigrants from the ways and demands of American society.
514
Little Italies
Clam seller in New York City’s Little Italy around 1900. (Library of Congress)
He points out that these immigrants, having distanced themselves from the
old culture in Italy, needed a certain amount of time to understand and par-
ticipate in the social organizations of the new society in the United States.
The Little Italies acted as bridges between the old life in Italy and the new life
Works such as Italian Americans into the Twilight of Ethnicity (1985), by Rich-
ard Alba, and The Italians (1976), by Patricia Snyder Weibust, Gennaro Capo-
bianco, and Sally Innis Gould, describe the growth and decay that Little
Italies have undergone in U.S. cities. Between the 1880’s and early 1940’s, the
Little Italies flourished, giving birth to many Italian American-owned busi-
nesses (including restaurants, bakeries, groceries, clothing shops, butcher
shops, and pasta shops), Italian-language newspapers, and mutual benefit so-
cieties (organizations involved in helping Italian immigrants deal with sick-
ness, death, and loneliness). Moreover, these communities were host to cele-
brations of festa (Italian religious festivals) and other religious activities.
Before World War II, Little Italies reached their peak in development and
activities. However, after the 1940’s, these communities began to shrink,
partly because second- and third-generation Italian Americans were becom-
ing wealthier and leaving the Little Italies for the suburbs. In addition, few
Italians were immigrating to the United States. Since the 1970’s, the bulk of
Italian Americans have lived outside the Little Italies, where only a semblance
remains of the old order. The number of Italian American-owned businesses,
515
Little Tokyos
Italian-language newspapers, and mutual benefit societies in these communi-

ties has decreased tremendously. Certain activities, such as the festas, have
continued to be held in Little Italies, some as simple appearances and others
to keep the memories alive of an earlier time.
Louis Gesualdi
Further Reading
Burgan, Michael. Italian Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005.
ican Experience. New York: HarperCollins, 1992.
Mormino, Gary Ross. Immigrants on the Hill: Italian Americans in St. Louis, 1882-
1982. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1986.
Yans-McLaughlin, Virginia. Family and Community—Italian Immigrants in Buf-
falo, 1880-1930. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1971.
See also Chinatowns; Ethnic enclaves; Generational acculturation; Italian

immigrants; Little Havana; Little Tokyos.
Little Tokyos
Definition: Predominantly Japanese enclaves in western U.S. cities
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Ethnic enclaves; Japanese immi-

grants
Significance: Slower to develop in American cities than Chinatowns, most of

the “Little Tokyos” of western U.S. cities disappeared during World War II
and afterward took on much different forms.
The first “Little Tokyo” arose in Southern California during the late nine-
teenth century. Around 1885, Japanese immigrants in Los Angeles gradually
populated a small section of the city that became known as Little Tokyo. By
1910, Japanese shops, restaurants, language schools, and shrines were estab-
lished, and Little Tokyo became the home of nearly 37,000 Japanese.
Before World War II, Little Tokyos were also established in Seattle (almost
11,700 Japanese immigrants) and in San Francisco, where the Japanese eth-
nic community was the third largest in the United States, at about 5,000.
Other Little Tokyos of more than 1,000 were in Sacramento and Stockton,
California, Portland, Oregon, and New York City.
Although Japanese people began immigrating to the United States as early
as the mid-1850’s, Little Tokyos took much longer to be established than
516
Little Tokyos
Chinatowns, probably because of

the cultural differences between
the two groups. The Japanese tra-
ditionally believed that agriculture
was the most virtuous occupation
and that people who made their
living as merchants were less re-
spectable. As a result, the majority
of the early Japanese immigrants
gravitated to rural areas to be farm-
ers, as opposed to the Chinese im-
migrants, who were usually mer-
chants in the city.
In Canada, before World War II,
more than 97 percent of Japanese
immigrants resided in the prov-
ince of British Columbia. By 1931,
nearly one-third of the Japanese
population (about 8,300) lived in
Vancouver, and more than half of
them were in the district known
as Little Tokyo. This was the only
Japanese ethnic community in
Canada in those days. However,
no physical structures or symbolic Sign at the entrance of a Japanese-owned shop in
Los Angeles’s Little Tokyo in April, 1942. Along with
buildings such as shrines were built
virtually all persons of Japanese ancestry living on
because of severe anti-Asian senti- the West Coast, the proprietor of the shop was
ment. about to be “relocated” to an internment camp for
During World War II, Little To- the duration of World War II, and he wished to
kyos practically disappeared from serve notice that he would not be taking his busi-
North America following the in- ness with him. (Library of Congress)
carceration of people of Japanese
descent in internment camps. During the 1970’s and 1980’s, when the politi-
cal and economic relationships between the United States and Japan flour-
ished, Japanese Americans began to revitalize Little Tokyos. However, by
then, Little Tokyos had become more tourist attractions than residential ar-
eas. Today new generations of Japanese Americans tend to live in all parts of
the city and suburbs.
In Canada, after World War II, Japanese internees were not allowed to re-
turn to their homes in British Columbia. They had to choose between going
to Japan or relocating to other provinces east of the Rocky Mountains. In
1949, Japanese Canadians were finally permitted to return to British Colum-
bia. Some people returned and reestablished Little Tokyo in Vancouver.
However, new generations of Japanese Canadians, like Japanese Americans,
tend to live in the suburbs. Although Vancouver’s Little Tokyo still maintains
517
Machine politics
shops and restaurants along with cultural activities, people who work there do
not live in that area.
Since the 1970’s, Japanese corporations have sent many nationals to work
in the United States and Canada. These workers are often encouraged to live
among North Americans in order to become more proficient at speaking En-
glish and to avoid creating a threatening Japanese “ghetto.” Japanese super-
markets, bookstores, and restaurants have sprung up in various cities where
many Japanese nationals work, including Seattle, Portland, Chicago, New
York City, and Vancouver. These new “Little Tokyos,” which are smaller in size
than the prewar Little Tokyos and may not be as concentrated, are usually just
shopping centers.
Nobuko Adachi
Further Reading
Laguerre, Michel S. The Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manila-
town in American Society. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999.
See also Alien land laws; Chinatowns; Ethnic enclaves; Generational ac-
culturation; Japanese immigrants; Little Havana; Little Italies.
Machine politics
Definition: Largely nonideological form of politics dominated by a small
elite, usually corrupt, based on the exchange of material benefits for politi-
cal support
Immigration issue: Government and politics
Significance: Machine politics was at its peak during the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries in response to the needs of a growing urban pop-
ulation, which included many immigrants. The excesses of machine poli-
tics generated numerous political reform measures that remain part of
contemporary politics.
Machine politics is characterized by a tightly organized political structure

dominated by an individual “boss” or a small cadre of leaders who stay in
power by brokering a variety of benefits such as jobs, contracts, protection,
and other privileges in exchange for political support. This exchange fre-
518
Machine politics
quently takes the form of benefits

for money in the form of campaign
contributions, kickbacks, and out-
right bribery.
The prototype of the political
machine is as old as the American
nation. The New York Society of
Tammany was founded in 1785 as a
social club named after a Delaware
Indian chief. It rapidly evolved into
a partisan organization that sup-
ported candidates for public office
and remained a force in politics
through the early twentieth cen-
tury. Like other such organizations
during the early nineteenth cen-
tury, its strength increased with the
expansion of voting during the Jack-
sonian era. The power of political
machines further increased with “Boss” William Marcy Tweed (1823-1878) was
the growth of immigration. By or- one of the most crooked politicians in U.S . history
ganizing the newly arrived voters but in his drive to buy and solicit votes, he did much
through strict party discipline, Tam- to help immigrants in New York City. (Library of
many Hall was able to control the Congress)
political “spoils.” It rapidly became
a widely copied model of graft-ridden politics.
When immigration increased after the Civil War, the political machine
reached its zenith. In the case of Tammany, this period marked the rise of one
of history’s most famous bosses, William Marcy Tweed, or “Boss Tweed.”
Tweed became a Tammany leader or “sachem” in 1857. He was soon elected,
with Tammany support, to the New York Board of Supervisors and from there
expanded his base by controlling patronage and public contracts. By 1868, he
was a state senator and a dominant force in politics. It has been estimated that
his corrupt “ring” had stolen nearly two hundred million dollars from public
funds and other sources. Tweed was eventually arrested and died in jail, but
machine politics continued to prosper through the early twentieth century.
Most cities had some degree of machine politics.
Some of the most famous machine bosses include Frank Hague of Jersey
City, James Curley of Boston, Ed Crump of Memphis, Tom Pendergast of
Kansas City, Huey Long of Louisiana, and Richard J. Daley of Chicago. The
growth of machines paralleled the rise of large cities. Though there were
“courthouse gangs” or rural versions of the machine, the typical structure was
a well-controlled urban population organized by a political party that cared
primarily for staying in office for reasons of power and money rather than ide-
ology.
519
Machine politics
Functions of the Machine Though the corruption of machine politics

cannot be minimized, scholars have found that the rise of machines can be
explained by the unique set of social and economic conditions associated
with immigration. As the United States became more urban, new tasks had
to be performed to meet changing conditions. The political machine filled
this vacuum. Most important, the machine performed a much-needed wel-
fare function. It helped families and individuals find jobs through political
patronage, obtain housing, and deal with personal crises such as fire or ill-
ness by providing financial and even emotional support. It also helped to so-
cialize the newly arriving immigrants into both American culture and po-
litical life. It facilitated the assimilation of newcomers because it needed
balanced tickets in which various ethnic voting blocks were included. This
fact provided upward mobility and helped to lower the level of ethnic con-
flict. Machines also centralized power, which generated a measure of support
from business and commercial interests. Centralization had become neces-
sary, because a legacy of the Jacksonian era was the “long ballot” and the mul-
tiplying of elected offices. By centralizing decision making, the machine in-
creased the efficiency of a fragmented system and helped to personalize
government.
Decline of Machines Although machine politics persists in American

politics, the classic machine organization had declined by the mid-twentieth
century for a number of reasons. Primarily, a large-scale reform movement
motivated by the corruption and waste of the machines was successful in pass-
ing a number of “good government” measures. Among these were civil ser-
vice and merit system reforms which undermined the machine’s patronage
base, the short ballot, nonpartisan elections, city manager forms of govern-
ment, direct primaries, and at-large elections. These structural reforms con-
tributed greatly to the demise of the machine. Just as important, a growing
middle class became far less tolerant of the scandals and corruption associ-
ated with the machine. Coupled with the rise of new management theories
which aimed at removing politics from government in order to model it on a
businesslike paradigm, the culture which supported the traditional machine
disappeared. Finally, the growth of welfare programs initiated by the New
Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression
eliminated the functional basis of the machine. New agencies and programs
took over the welfare activities of the machine.
Although the classical machine was undermined by reform efforts as well
as changing social circumstances, machine politics continues in one form or
another. Some would argue that machine politics, stripped of its corruption,
represents a form of responsive politics in action. Nevertheless, the ultimate
legacy of machine politics is the structural and social reforms that marked the
end of the machine era. While some would argue that the reform legacy has
weakened political parties too much and that the bureaucratic structures that
accompanied reform have created their own set of problems, the positive
520
Mail-order brides
functions of machines did not outweigh their corruption and the cynicism
they caused, which served to undermine public faith in democratic institu-
tions.
Melvin Kulbicki
Further Reading Informative views of Tammany Hall include Seymour

Mandelbaum’s Boss Tweed’s New York (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965) and
William Riordon’s Plunkitt of Tammany Hall (New York: Dutton, 1963). The
Daley machine of Chicago is the subject of Milton L. Rakove’s Don’t Make No
Waves—Don’t Back No Losers (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975).
Broader perspectives are taken in Lincoln Steffens’s The Shame of the Cities
(New York: Sagamore Press, 1957), Alfred Steinberg’s The Bosses (New York:
Macmillan, 1972), Susan Welch and Timothy Bledsoe’s Urban Reform and Its
Consequences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), and Edward C.
Banfield and James Q. Wilson’s City Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1963). A classic novel about machine politics is Edwin
O’Connor’s The Last Hurrah (Boston: Little, Brown, 1956).
See also Discrimination; Ethnic enclaves; European immigrants, 1790-

1892; Hull-House; Irish immigrants; Know-Nothing Party; Nativism.
Mail-order brides
Definition: Women who immigrate to other countries to marry local citi-
zens whom they meet through supervised introduction services conducted
through correspondence
Significance: Thousands of marriages in the United States and other coun-

tries are arranged by mail, typically through international dating and in-
troduction services.
The system of arranging marriages with “mail-order brides” is an old part of

the North American social landscape. During the nineteenth century, there
were so few women in the Canadian and U.S. frontiers that newspapers in
those regions routinely carried advertisements for wives placed by lonely
farmers or ranchers. While little is known about how many marriages were
formed through the mail or how successful they were, this was apparently a
fairly common form of courtship.
521
Mail-order brides
Modern Mail-Order Brides During the twentieth century, finding mates

by mail became a comparatively rare occurrence in North America. After
mass transportation and the automobile became common, dating became
the primary form of courtship. American cultural values placed heavy em-
phasis on romantic love as a motivation for marrying. The ideal of romantic
love required that men and women develop intense emotional intimacy be-
fore marriage, and intimacy can rarely be created at a distance.
Despite the cultural emphasis on dating and romantic love, mail-order
marriages began to become more common in the period following World
War II. Sociologists, psychologists, and anthropologists have often noted that
men and women tend to look for different characteristics in mates. Men are
more likely to look for youth and physical attractiveness. Women are more
likely to look for mates who are financially secure. As worldwide transporta-
tion and communications have improved, men in relatively prosperous coun-
tries could make contact with younger women in comparatively low-income
countries. Between 1968 and 1981, for example, more than seven hundred
women emigrated to France from the island of Mauritius as mail-order brides
for lonely middle-aged French farmers.
During the 1970’s, Asia, and especially the Philippines, became an impor-
tant source of mail-order brides for men in the United States. Because the
Philippines was an American colony from 1898 to 1945, Filipinas are often
able to speak English and are typically more familiar with American culture
than other Asian women. Filipino and American entrepreneurs set up intro-
duction services to put American men searching for wives in contact with
Filipinas searching for financially stable husbands. Most often, international
introduction services put potential spouses in contact with one another by mar-
keting catalogs containing the photographs of women with their addresses and
personal information. By the late 1990’s several of these catalogs were avail-
able through the Internet as well as by regular mail.
It has been estimated that by the 1990’s approximately nineteen thousand
mail-order brides left the Philippines each year to join husbands and fiancés
abroad, with the United States as their primary destination. In 1997 the social
scientist Concepcion Montoya identified Filipina mail-order brides, who of-
ten established social networks among themselves, as a rapidly emerging
American community.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia and eastern Europe
became major sources of mail-order brides for the Americas and Western Eu-
rope. The difficulties of the Russian economy during the 1990’s caused many
young Russian women to seek more prosperous lives abroad. As in the Philip-
pines, catalogs served as the primary way in which men initially made contact
with potential brides. One of the best-known of these catalogs was European
Connections, a quarterly containing photographs of women in Russia and east-
ern Europe. For $8.00 to $15.00, American men could order the addresses of
women in the catalog. European Connections and other introduction services
also arranged expeditions to Russia for American and western European men.
522
Mail-order brides
Stereotypes and Negative Views Many Americans hold unfavorable

views of men who marry foreign women whom they have met through the
mail. Popular opinion often holds that men who seek brides abroad are look-
ing for obedient wives whom they can easily dominate. Many people see hus-
bands of mail-order brides as such undesirable mates that they cannot find
mates by more conventional means. Women who become mail-order brides
are often seen either as exploited victims or as opportunists selling them-
selves for comfortable lives.
A number of widely publicized incidents have reinforced the negative
views many people hold about introductions and marriages by mail. Some
mail-order brides have indeed suffered at the hands of their husbands. Ac-
cording to news reports, for example, sixteen Filipina mail-order brides be-
tween 1980 and 1995 were murdered by husbands in Australia. In the United
States a similar occurrence received national attention in 1995. A man in Se-
attle, Washington, had brought a Filipina wife he had met through the mail to
the United States. The marriage did not work out and the wife sought a di-
vorce. In response, the husband contacted the Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service, claiming that his estranged wife no longer qualified for resi-
dence in the United States and should be deported back to the Philippines.
The woman, who had become pregnant with another man’s child, was sitting
in a Seattle courthouse waiting for a hearing on her residency status when her
husband drew a gun and killed her and several of her friends.
There is no doubt that mail-order brides are sometimes exploited by their
husbands and that women in a new country can be vulnerable. Cultural con-
flicts and conflicts of expectations can also trouble international marriages.
Women from the Philippines, for example, often expect to have full control
over matters pertaining to the household and do not see themselves as im-
ported servants. While there is little information on the success rates of mail-
order marriages, available evidence suggests that the horror stories of wife
abuse are the exception rather than the rule and that many of these mar-
riages work out to the satisfaction of both parties.
Research on Mail-Order Marriages The sociologists William M. Kep-

hart and Davor Jedlicka have conducted extensive research on the mail-order
marriage process. Kephart and Jedlicka conducted interviews with agents
and clients of international introduction services and studied the advertise-
ments in their catalogs. These researchers found that the process began when
men selected photographs of women and sent the women photographs of
themselves. Selection on the basis of appearance, however, was only a first
step. Next, prospective partners began exchanging letters. Usually these let-
ters were quite long and detailed and contained extensive information on the
tastes, interests, values, and plans of both parties. By necessity, the exchange
of letters meant that the women had good, if not excellent, English-language
skills. Once couples decided to marry, the American men usually went
abroad to meet their future wives. This step became a necessity after January
523
Mariel boatlift
1987, when the marriage-fraud provision of the 1986 Immigration Act pro-
hibited foreigners from coming to the United States to marry people whom
they had never met.
Kephart and Jedlicka found that the majority of American men who be-
came involved in mail-order marriages had had some unfortunate experi-
ence with courtship and marriage in the United States. Over half of them had
been divorced and 75 percent had been through some kind of traumatic ex-
perience with women in the United States. Most were at least thirty-seven
years old. The men earned above-average incomes and were above average in
educational attainment and occupational level.
Most of the women involved in mail-order marriages were twenty-five years
old or younger. Contrary to popular stereotypes, fewer than 10 percent came
from the countryside or held menial jobs in their home countries. The major-
ity were college students and about 30 percent held professional, managerial,
or clerical jobs requiring fairly high levels of education. Marrying foreign
men did not seem to be the choice of peasant women, but of middle-class
women with aspirations that could not be easily satisfied in their native coun-
tries.
Further Reading
Kephart, William M., and Davor Jedlicka. The Family, Society, and the Individual.
7th ed. New York: HarperCollins, 1991.
Larsen, Wanwadee. Confessions of a Mail Order Bride: American Life Through Thai
Eyes. Far Hills, N.J.: New Horizon Press, 1989.
Montoya, Concepcion. “Mail Order Brides: An Emerging Community.” In Fil-
ipino Americans: Transformation and Identity, edited by Maria P. P. Root.
Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1997.
See also Filipino immigrants and family customs; Japanese immigrants;

Korean immigrants and family customs; Picture brides; Russian immigrants;
War brides; Women immigrants.
Mariel boatlift
The Event: Massive influx of Cuban refugees into the United States
Date: May-September, 1980
Place: Cuba, Florida, and waters between
Immigration issues: Cuban immigrants; Refugees
Significance: This sudden increase in Cuban refugees provoked an agoniz-

ing reappraisal of U.S. refugee policy.
524
Mariel boatlift
After Fidel Castro became ruler of Cuba in January, 1959, relations between
the United States and Cuba steadily deteriorated, as Castro turned his coun-
try into a communist state allied with the Soviet Union, the main U.S. rival
during the Cold War. Diplomatic relations with Cuba were broken, and an
economic embargo was imposed upon the country.
The communization of Cuba alienated Cubans as well. From 1959 to 1962
(when Castro halted all further airplane flights from the island), about
200,000 Cubans fled their homeland, most of them settling in Miami. In late
1965, special freedom flights of refugees were organized with the coopera-
tion of the Castro government; although registration for these flights was
closed off in 1966, the flights themselves continued until 1973. The early refu-
gees were disproportionately from Cuba’s professional and white-collar classes;
with extensive financial assistance from the U.S. government, and their own
hard work, they achieved a remarkable level of prosperity in the United States
in a short time.
Hopes for rapprochement with Castro rose in 1977, when Jimmy Carter be-
came president of the United States. A United States Interests section of the
Swiss embassy was established in Havana, under a State Department official,
Wayne Smith, to handle relations between Cuba and the United States. When
Castro persisted in his military intervention in the African nation of Angola,
however, plans for lifting the U.S. embargo were shelved indefinitely. In Octo-
ber, 1979, relations with Castro deteriorated when Washington, D.C., wel-
comed the hijacker of a Cuban boat as a freedom fighter.
Between January and March, 1979, Castro, to polish his image abroad and
to gain badly needed foreign currency, allowed more than 115,000 Cuban
Americans to visit their relatives in Cuba. The apparent prosperity of the Cu-
ban Americans caused discontent among Cubans on the island because of the
austerity and lack of consumer choices in the island’s socialist economy.
Mariel Refugees On April 1, 1980, six Cubans commandeered a Havana

city bus and drove it through the gate of the Peruvian embassy, demand-
ing asylum; in the ensuing melee, one Cuban guard was killed. Castro re-
sponded by removing the police guards from the embassy. By April 9, 1980,
about ten thousand more Cubans had crowded into the embassy, demanding
the right of political asylum. On April 16, with Castro’s permission, airplane
flights began to take asylum-seekers to Costa Rica; on April 18, however, Cas-
tro, embarrassed by the blow to his image abroad, suddenly canceled these
flights. On April 20, he opened the port of Mariel to all those who wished to
leave the island and to anyone who wished to ferry discontented Cubans to
Florida.
Persons sympathetic to the plight of the would-be emigrants chartered
boats to sail to Mariel, pick up those who wanted to leave, and bring them to
Key West, Florida. Once in Mariel, the boats’ skippers were forced to accept
everyone whom Cuban authorities wanted to be rid of, including criminals,
the mentally ill, and homosexuals. Because some of the boats were not sea-
525
Mariel boatlift
worthy, a tragic accident was always a possibility; and the U.S. Coast Guard
sometimes had to rescue refugees from boats in danger of sinking.
President Carter, distracted by the Iranian hostage crisis and the worsen-
ing of relations with the Soviet Union after the latter’s occupation of Afghani-
stan, vacillated in regard to the boatlift. In a speech given on May 5, Carter
urged the people of the United States to welcome the refugees with open
arms. On May 14, however, he threatened criminal penalties for those who
used boats to pick up Cubans, and ordered the Coast Guard to stop the
boatlift by arresting and fining the skippers and seizing the boats. Without co-
operation from Castro, this order was largely ineffective. It was not until Sep-
tember 25, after hard bargaining between Castro and State Department ne-
gotiators Smith and Peter Tarnoff, that Castro ended the boatlift; several
hundred would-be refugees who had missed the boatlift were allowed to take
air flights out of Cuba in November.
Between April and September, 1980, south Florida bore the brunt of the
tidal wave of refugees, which is estimated to have reached as many as 125,000.
In the Miami area, social services, health services, schools, and law enforce-
ment authorities found their resources strained to the breaking point by the
sudden influx. Housing was suddenly in short supply; quite a few Mariel refu-
gees in Florida had to sleep in the Orange Bowl, underneath a highway over-
pass, or in tent cities. On May 6, Carter, in response to pleas from Florida gov-
ernor Bob Graham, declared Florida a disaster area and authorized ten
million dollars in relief for that state to help defray the cost of the refugee in-
flux; U.S. Marines were sent to Florida to help process the refugees.
Camps and Discrimination In June, 1980, President Carter ordered all

those refugees who had not found relatives or others willing to sponsor them
placed in detention camps in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Arkansas. In
Pennsylvania and Arkansas, the refugees, bored and fearful about their fu-
ture, rioted. By October, the majority of the Marielitos had been released into
various communities, and the detention camps were closed.
News of the riots fueled a growing backlash in U.S. public opinion against
the Mariel refugees. The much-publicized presence of criminals among the
refugees also helped generate a feeling of revulsion against the entire group:
Marielitos were blamed for the upsurge in violent crime in Miami in 1981. In
1980, a year of economic downturn, many people in the United States feared
that more Cuban refugees would mean higher unemployment.
Once released from custody, Marielitos faced a difficult adjustment. Un-
like earlier Cuban refugees, the Marielitos did not arrive in the midst of gen-
eral prosperity; they came when the twin plagues of inflation and recession
were besetting a U.S. economy still struggling to absorb refugees from Viet-
nam, Laos, and Cambodia. Hence, Marielitos did not receive as much finan-
cial assistance from the federal government as earlier Cuban refugees. In ad-
dition, more of the Marielitos were poorly educated people from blue-collar
backgrounds; more of them were single men without family ties; and a larger
526
Mariel boatlift
percentage of them were black or mulatto. Marielitos of all colors faced preju-
dice and discrimination, not merely from Euro-Americans but also from longer-
settled Cuban Americans, who saw the Marielitos as insufficiently hardwork-
ing and feared that popular U.S. resentment of the Marielitos might rub off
on them. In 1983, Marielitos in Miami had an unemployment rate of 27 per-
cent; although the rate had been cut to 13 percent by 1986, they still lagged
behind longer-settled Cuban Americans in employment and income.
Marielitos who ran afoul of the law quickly discovered that, however minor
their offenses, they had fewer rights than native-born U.S. criminals. Mariel-
itos who had criminal records in Cuba or who committed crimes in the
United States faced incarceration for an indefinite term in federal prisons. In
1985, President Ronald Reagan secured a promise from Castro to take back
Marielito criminals; only a few hundred had been deported when Castro, en-
raged by U.S. sponsorship of Radio Martí—an anti-Castro radio broadcast—
canceled the agreement.
In November, 1987, a new agreement provided for the deportation to
Cuba of Marielito criminals in return for the acceptance by the United States
of Cuban political prisoners; upon hearing of the agreement, Marielitos held
in federal prisons in Oakdale, Louisiana, and Atlanta, Georgia, rioted, taking
hostages. The riots ended only when the Reagan administration promised
that no prisoner would be sent back to Cuba without individual consideration
on his or her case, and that some of those whose offenses were relatively mi-
nor would be released into the community. As late as 1995, however, eighteen
hundred Marielitos were still incarcerated in federal prisons, and hundreds
of them were still being held a decade later.
The American Reaction When the Mariel boatlift began, Islamic mili-
tants in Iran had already publicly humiliated the United States government
by seizing and holding captive U.S. diplomatic personnel. The seemingly un-
controllable Cuban refugee influx came to be seen as a symbol, not of the
bankruptcy of communism, but of Carter’s alleged ineptitude in conducting
U.S. foreign policy. U.S. voters’ anger over the refugee influx, together with
widespread frustration over the economic recession and the Iranian hostage
crisis, helped doom Carter’s bid for reelection in November, 1980.
The Mariel boatlift of 1980 revived xenophobia among people in the
United States. Until 1980, much of the U.S. public had seen Cuban refugees
as courageous freedom fighters, comparable to Czechs or Hungarians fleeing
Soviet tanks rather than to Puerto Ricans or Mexicans fleeing poverty. How-
ever, the presence of criminals and misfits among the Marielitos shattered the
benign Cuban stereotype. After 1980, sentiment built steadily for reducing
the number of immigrants and refugees admitted into the United States. The
ultimate consequence of the Mariel boatlift of 1980 was President Bill Clin-
ton’s decision in August, 1994, when faced with a new exodus from Cuba, to
eliminate the privileged status of Cuban asylum-seekers.
Paul D. Mageli
527
Mariel boatlift
Further Reading
Hamm, Mark S. The Abandoned Ones: The Imprisonment and Uprising of the Mariel
Boat People. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1995. One of the best
studies to date of the Marielito prison riots of 1987; also contains much in-
formation on the 1980 boatlift itself. Argues that federal policy denied the
prisoners basic human rights.
Larzelere, Alex. Castro’s Ploy, America’s Dilemma: The 1980 Cuban Boat Lift.
Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Press, 1988. Detailed study
of the boatlift, especially valuable for its look at the decision-making pro-
cess within the Carter administration. Relies heavily on interviews con-
ducted in 1986 with Carter-era officials.
Half-Open Door, 1945-Present. New York: Free Press, 1986. Chapter nine ex-
amines the effect of the Mariel boatlift on the shaping of U.S. refugee pol-
icy in general. Criticizes Carter’s response to the boatlift as indecisive.
Pedraza-Bailey, Silvia. Political and Economic Migrants in America: Cubans and
Mexicans. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1985. Chapter two compares
the demographic portrait of the Marielitos with that of earlier Cuban refu-
gees. Explains why the proportion of Afro-Cubans among the Marielitos
was greater than in previous refugee flows.
Portes, Alejandro, and Alex Stepick. City on the Edge: The Transformation of Mi-
ami. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. Chapter two shows that
Miami’s English-speaking whites and better-established Cuban Americans
were both guilty of prejudice and discrimination against Marielitos. One of
the few deep studies of the Marielitos’ adjustment problems; regional fo-
cus, however, limits the book’s usefulness for those interested in the
Marielito experience throughout the United States.
Smith, Wayne S. The Closest of Enemies: A Personal and Diplomatic History of the
Castro Years. New York: W. W. Norton, 1987. Chapter eight provides a first-
hand account of the intergovernmental talks that ended the boatlift. One
must be skeptical, however, of the author’s tendency to blame U.S. policy
failures on his superiors’ refusal to follow his advice.
or Engagement? Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2005. Broad study of
American immigration and refugee policy as it pertains to Cuba.
See also Coast Guard, U.S.; Cuban immigrants; Cuban immigrants and Af-
rican Americans; Cuban refugee policy; González rescue; Haitian boat peo-
ple; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
528
Melting pot
Melting pot
Definition: Metaphor equating a cooking vessel in which diverse ingredi-
ents are blended to the United States, in which diverse immigrants are as-
similated and blended into a single society
Immigration issues: Language; Native Americans; Religion; Sociological

theories
Significance: This two-century-old metaphor has long been applied to the

United States, but by the late twentieth century, as members of ethnic and
racial minorities increasingly asserted their distinctiveness and autonomy,
the aptness of the metaphor was called into question.
In the melting pot metaphor, the melting together of diverse nationalities

and races creates one entity, a new American identity. In 1782, French im-
migrant Michel-Guillaume-Jean de Crèvecœur, using the more American-
sounding pen name J. Hector St. John, published a collection of essays titled
Letters from an American Farmer. These essays praised the quality of rural life in
colonial America. In one essay titled “What Is an American?” he wrote, “Here,
individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men.” European immi-
grants left oppression, hunger, ignorance, and poverty behind to pursue life,
liberty, and happiness in North America. From Crèvecœur’s perspective, they
blended their cultures into a new identity, dedicated to the goals of freedom
and equality.
History Crèvecœur came to Canada in 1754 during the French and Indian
War as a soldier. After the war, he roamed the country and surveyed land
around the Great Lakes. In 1765, he became a citizen of New York, married,
and became a gentleman farmer. During the Revolution, he refused to take
sides against British loyalists, so American patriots arrested and jailed him as
a spy. When he was released, he fled, in fear for his life, to France, leaving his
wife and children behind. French citizens found his essay collections interest-
ing, and he became a minor celebrity. Benjamin Franklin helped Crèvecœur
secure an appointment as French consul to New York. When he returned in
1783, he found his wife dead, his farmhouse burned, and his children living
in foster homes.
In later essays, Crèvecœur revised his idealistic theory of a homogenous
American society. He observed that the first wave of immigrants on the fron-
tier lived in isolation with weak ties to government, religion, or morality.
Their communities and farms symbolized hard work and self-reliance, and
they were reluctant to make room for succeeding waves of immigrants. Some
were assimilated, but debtors, speculators, traders, and castoffs of society
moved on. Many of these people created problems with the Native American
population.
529
Melting pot
In 1908, Israel Zangwill saw his

Broadway play The Melting Pot per-
formed. The four-act play drama-
tizes and resolves the conflict of
Jewish separatism and Russian anti-
Semitism. Walker Whiteside, star
of the play, spoke the lines, “Amer-
ica is God’s Crucible, the great
Melting Pot where all the races
are melting and reforming.” Al-
though critics gave the play bad
reviews, audiences kept it running
for 136 performances. The meta-
phor of the melting pot entered
the American vocabulary.
Ironically, Zangwill became an
ardent Zionist only eight years af-
English author and playwright Israel Zangwill (1864- ter the opening of The Melting Pot
1926), who coined the term “melting pot,” wrote and repudiated the theme of his
mostly about Jewish life and culture. (Library of Con- play. He declared that a charac-
gress) ter’s statement that there should
be neither Jew nor Greek was
wrong. According to Zangwill, different races and religions could not mix, or
at least not do so easily; a person’s natural ethnicity would return.
At Issue The theory that American society is homogenous assumes that

people from different ethnic backgrounds will resolve their differences in an
environment of freedom and opportunity. The process of “melting” the ori-
gins, religions, languages, and traditions of Europeans, Asians, Africans, and
Native Americans into a unique American identity is demonstrably incom-
plete. Whether the melting of various ethnicities into a new whole is a worthy
or a possible goal is a source of controversy.
Many immigrants have been unwilling or unable to abandon their past
identity for a new one. Strangers in a strange land naturally cling to what is fa-
miliar; assimilation has often been slow and difficult. Established groups, in
turn, have set up legal, economic, and religious barriers to prevent assimila-
tion of different races. In 1660, eighteen languages were spoken on Manhat-
tan Island. In that heavily populated area during the 1990’s, at least that many
are spoken, probably many more. Those who criticize the metaphor of the
melting pot point out that the United States has always been and continues to
be multiethnic, multilingual, and multicultural, and that therefore the melt-
ing pot is more of a misguided ideal than an accurate representation of the
acculturation process in the United States. The ideal, critics of the melting
pot may argue, often covers morally questionable motives that are based on
hatred of difference.
530
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
On the other hand, the melting pot metaphor still seems apt for Ameri-
cans whose ancestors represent multiple ethnic groups, for example, some-
one with a German-Scotch-Cherokee heritage. To many others, however, the
term “multicultural” applies to American society more realistically. Many
Americans with distinct ethnicity like to use the metaphor of a bowl of tossed
salad, in which each culture is represented as a separate entity.
Martha E. Rhynes
Further Reading
Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2001.
Crèvecœur, Michel-Guillaume-Jean de. “What Is an American?” In Letters from
an American Farmer. New York: Fox, Duffield, 1904.
Jacoby, Tamar, ed. Reinventing the Melting Pot: The New Immigrants and What It
Means to Be American. New York: Basic Books, 2004.
migrant, 1897-1933. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI, 2001.
See also Assimilation theories; Bilingual Education Act of 1968; Chinese

American Citizens Alliance; Cultural pluralism; European immigrant litera-
ture; Generational acculturation; History of U.S. immigration; Immigrant ad-
vantage; Immigration Act of 1921; Justice and immigration; Migration.
Mexican American Legal

Defense and Education
Fund
Identification: National nonprofit organization whose mission is to protect
and to promote the civil rights of Latinos in the United States
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Education; Latino immi-

grants; Mexican immigrants
531
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
Significance: Also known as MALDEF, the Mexican American Legal De-

fense and Education Fund has been one of the most active and influential
rights organizations to look after the interests of immigrants in the United
States.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) was
founded in San Antonio, Texas, in 1968 as a legal aid society after decades of
discrimination and the violation of the civil rights of Mexican Americans. It
was established by a group of Hispanic attorneys who wanted to protect by “le-
gal actions and legal education” the constitutional rights of Mexican Ameri-
cans. Although Mexican Americans are still its most important constituency,
MALDEF now represents the broader Hispanic community, including both
documented and undocumented aliens.
From its first office in San Antonio, MALDEF established its national head-
quarters in Los Angeles, four regional offices in San Francisco, Chicago, San
Antonio, and Washington, D.C., and a program office in Sacramento, Califor-
nia. The organization is administered by a thirty-six-member board of direc-
tors, composed mostly of Hispanics, and its membership includes attorneys,
businessmen, educators, judges, law school professors, and public officials.
MALDEF has attorneys in each of its regional offices, but a national net-
work of referral lawyers from private law firms, corporations, and businesses
also provides pro bono services. Its activities are funded by foundations, such
as Walt Disney, Kaiser, and General Electric; private corporations, such as
Allstate Insurance, AT&T, AMOCO, Anheuser-Busch, Coca Cola, and IBM; la-
bor unions; and individual contributions. With these resources MALDEF as-
sists its clients in obtaining employment, education, immigration, political
access, and job training. It achieves these goals through litigation, advocacy,
educational outreach, law school scholarships, and leadership development.
The organization’s most important strategy is litigation, which is used to
implement legal action to eliminate discriminatory practices. MALDEF initi-
ates “class action” suits with one or more Mexican Americans representing a
larger group, pursues cases that reverse previous discriminatory practices,
such as in hiring and promotion practices, and establishes new precedents. It
has engaged in various lawsuits involving voting rights violations and discrimi-
natory election systems and utilizes many of its resources on the equitable en-
forcement of immigration legislation. Its top priority is the elimination of
barriers to the political process. Since MALDEF has long been opposed to the
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, it fights discrimination by em-
ployers against “foreign looking” legal immigrants and Hispanic American
citizens.
MALDEF continually monitors and lobbies for policies that directly bene-
fit Hispanics. Most prominent has been its efforts to defeat English-only pro-
posals in Congress and in various states, such as its challenge to the California
“Unz initiative” (Proposition 227) in 1997, which called for the virtual aboli-
tion of bilingual development programs that served over one million school
532
Mexican deportations during the Depression
students with limited English proficiency. In other recent initiatives, MALDEF

challenged the Texas high school “graduation” test requirement and sup-
ported the extension of a family-based visa program. It offers law school
scholarships to qualified students and sponsors efforts for more effective cen-
sus data that better represent the Hispanic population. It is probably the most
important modern Hispanic organization in that it has addressed the prob-
lems, needs, and concerns of its clients more than any other Hispanic organi-
zation. Its sponsorship of litigation and its lobbying activities have markedly
helped the Hispanic community in areas such as education, employment,
and political activism, all crucial to the future of Hispanics in U.S. society.
Martin J. Manning
Further Reading
Gonzalez, Gilbert G. Culture of Empire: American Writers, Mexico, and Mexican
Immigrants, 1880-1930. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2004.
sue for the Americas. Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1999.
See also Asian American Legal Defense Fund; Bracero program; Chicano
movement; Farmworkers’ union; Mexican deportations during the Depres-
sion; Operation Wetback; Undocumented workers.
Mexican deportations
during the Depression
The Event: Federal government initiative to deport Mexican laborers from
the United States
Date: Early 1930’s
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Discrimination; Government

and politics; Illegal immigration; Labor; Latino immigrants; Law enforce-
ment; Mexican immigrants
Significance: Massive unemployment during the Depression prompted de-

portation of immigrant workers in order to redistribute their jobs to U.S.
citizens.
During the early decades of the twentieth century, the immigration of Mexi-
can nationals into the United States was a growing phenomenon. It was not
533
viewed as a problem because the cheap labor they provided was welcomed,
particularly on farms and ranches. U.S. immigration laws generally were en-
forced selectively with regard to Mexicans. During World War I, at the request
of U.S. businesses, the provisions of the Immigration Act of 1917 that re-
quired immigrants to pay an eight-dollar “head tax” and prove their literacy
were waived for Mexican laborers. This special order legitimized U.S. depen-
dence on cheap Mexican labor and institutionalized Mexico’s special status.
At the end of World War I, the order was not rescinded; in fact, U.S. compa-
nies intensified their recruitment of Mexican farmworkers. Industrial compa-
nies in the Northeast and Midwest, such as steel mills and automobile manu-
facturers, also began recruiting Mexicans from the Southwest, resulting in an
expanding migration in terms of both numbers of immigrants and their geo-
graphic spread. The Emergency Quota Act of 1921 and the National Origins
Mexican farm workers harvesting carrots in California’s Imperial Valley during the late 1930’s. Be-
cause of the abundance of cheap labor, these workers were paid only eleven cents for each crate
of forty bunches of carrots that they picked, cleaned, tied, and crated. At that rate, each worker
was lucky to earn one dollar for a full day’s work. (Library of Congress)
534
Act (Immigration Act of 1924) had each limited immigration from Europe,
but no restrictions were imposed on the number of immigrants from coun-
tries in the Western Hemisphere. Thus, a large and growing population of
Mexican immigrants had established itself in the United States in the first de-
cades of the twentieth century.
A Change in Attitude During the 1920’s, the U.S. government’s attitude

toward Mexican immigrants gradually changed from lax enforcement to se-
vere restrictions. As social and economic conditions deteriorated on a global
scale, the great pool of cheap Mexican labor was increasingly resented by un-
employed U.S. citizens. Despite pressure from businesses, laws restricting en-
try—that is, the head tax and literacy test—began to be strictly enforced
against Mexicans by immigration authorities. Two new laws also were passed
that had a further chilling effect on Mexican immigration to the United
States: the Deportation Act of March 4, 1929, which made illegally entering
the United States a misdemeanor punishable by a year in prison or a fine of as
much as one thousand dollars, followed by the May 4, 1929, law making it a
felony for a deported alien to reenter the United States illegally. These laws,
followed by the October, 1929, stock market crash that marked the onset of
the Great Depression in the United States, set the stage for a period of repres-
sive measures against Mexican nationals in the United States.
As the Depression caused more unemployment, the caseloads of social
welfare agencies increased. By 1931, as the pool of unemployed immigrants
requiring assistance grew, local agencies intensified their efforts to force re-
patriation; on the federal level, calls to deport immigrants increased also.
President Herbert Hoover endorsed the aggressive efforts to expel aliens, re-
strict legal immigration, and curtail illegal entry. William N. Doak, who took
office as Hoover’s secretary of labor in December, 1930, proposed that any
alien holding a job be deported. The Bureau of Immigration, at that time a
part of the Department of Labor, began an aggressive campaign of rooting
out illegal aliens, with the objective of reducing unemployment and thus has-
tening the end of the Great Depression. Many of the aliens deported under
this program, however, were already unemployed.
Although Mexicans were not specifically targeted by the immigration au-
thorities, they were numerically the most affected as a group. The response of
the Mexican government to the problem varied: At times, land reform pro-
grams were established for repatriating Mexican citizens; at other times, Mex-
ico feared the addition of more unemployed citizens to its labor surplus. Op-
portunities for Mexican Americans to obtain land in Mexico usually required
money to be invested, although occasionally there were programs that of-
fered land to destitute repatriates.
California’s Response In the southwestern states, particularly, immigra-

tion officials aggressively sought deportable Mexicans, and social service agen-
cies encouraged Mexicans to volunteer for repatriation. The most ambitious
535
of these programs was undertaken in Los Angeles County, California, but cit-
ies such as Chicago and Detroit, where Mexicans had been recruited by in-
dustry during the early 1920’s, also were actively attempting to get even legal
Mexican residents to leave during the 1930’s.
The Los Angeles Citizens Committee on Coordination of Unemployment
Relief, headed by Charles P. Visel, had been charged with assisting the unem-
ployed residents of the city, especially through creation of jobs, for which
longtime local residents would be given preference. Inspired by Labor Secre-
tary Doak’s earlier pronouncements that some 400,000 deportable aliens
were believed to be in the country, Visel set out to identify and deport as many
illegal aliens as possible from the city of Los Angeles. Visel contacted Doak
and requested that a sufficient number of immigration agents be deployed in
Los Angeles to create a hostile environment, from which he hoped aliens
would flee voluntarily. Visel planned to open his campaign with press releases
and a few well-publicized arrests.
Although the plan was not aimed specifically at Mexicans, some statements
made by Visel did mention Mexicans as a group to be targeted. The Spanish-
language newspapers in Southern California stirred up the Mexican commu-
nity, both in Los Angeles and in Mexico, by publishing inaccurate stories that
virtually all Mexicans were being targeted for deportation. In the first three
weeks of February, 1931, immigration agents had investigated several thou-
sand people, 225 of whom were determined to be subject to deportation. Fig-
ures released by Visel’s committee in March, 1931, indicated that 70 percent
of the persons deported up to that time in the Los Angeles campaign were
Mexicans. According to the Mexican Chamber of Commerce, an estimated
10,000 of the more than 200,000 Mexicans thought to be living in Los Angeles
prior to 1931 had left; many of these repatriates owned businesses and homes
in Southern California. It should be noted, however, that the Chamber of
Commerce would be more likely to have contact with the more prosperous
members of the population than with the unemployed or laborers.
Concurrent with the federal and local campaigns to deport illegal aliens,
Los Angeles County officials began attempting to repatriate destitute Mexi-
cans. Many Mexican nationals had entered the United States at a time when
penalties for illegal entry were nonexistent or seldom enforced against Mexi-
cans; thus, their legal status was uncertain. With chances of unemployed Mex-
icans finding employment in the United States slim, welfare officials were be-
ginning to put pressure on alien relief recipients to return to Mexico, at times
leading them to believe that if they did not leave voluntarily, they would be
cut off from aid immediately.
Frank Shaw, a member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors,
was the first area official to propose paying the cost of transporting families
back to Mexico by train. In March, 1931, 350 Mexicans signed up for the first
trip. Many more trips were made, but statistics on the numbers who were re-
patriated under the county program are clouded by the fact that the same
trains that carried county-aided Mexicans also carried deportees and Mexi-
536
cans who had made their own arrangements to leave, and accurate records
were not kept. Overall, the various efforts to reduce the number of immi-
grants in Southern California during the early 1930’s caused a noticeable,
but temporary, reduction of the Mexican population in the area.
Irene Struthers Rush
Further Reading
Byrd, Bobby, and Susannah Mississippi Byrd, eds. The Late Great Mexican Bor-
der: Reports from a Disappearing Line. El Paso, Tex.: Cinco Puntos Press, 1996.
Sixteen essays that chronicle life on the U.S./Mexico border and the issues
and influences that are part of this landscape.
Cardoso, Lawrence A. “The Great Depression: Emigration Halts and Repatri-
ation Begins.” In Mexican Emigration to the United States, 1897-1931. Tucson:
University of Arizona Press, 1980. Brief discussion of federal deportation
efforts and local repatriation efforts during the early 1930’s. Includes bal-
lads (corridos) written by returning Mexicans lamenting their plight.
Hoffman, Abraham. Unwanted Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pres-
sure, 1929-1939. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1974. Well-researched,
comprehensive look at the deportation and repatriation of Mexicans, par-
ticularly from Los Angeles County, during the 1930’s.
Meier, Matt S., and Feliciano Ribera. Mexican Americans and American Mexi-
cans: From Conquistadors to Chicanos. Rev. ed. of The Chicanos, 1972. New
York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1993. Comprehensive history of the Mexi-
can presence in the United States. Pages 153-157 discuss deportation and
repatriation during the 1930’s.
Samora, Julian. “Los Mojados”: The Wetback Story. Notre Dame, Ind.: University
of Notre Dame Press, 1971. Discusses illegal immigration from Mexico in
the twentieth century, including a chapter by a graduate student assisting
the author, who attempted to enter the country illegally.
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Bracero program; Deportation; Immigration

law; Latinos and employment; Mexican American Legal Defense and Educa-
tion Fund; Operation Wetback; Undocumented workers.
537
Middle Eastern immigrant families
Middle Eastern immigrant

families
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the predominantly Mus-
lim nations of the Middle East
Immigration issues: Families and marriage; Jewish immigrants; Middle East-

ern immigrants
Significance: In a tradition-bound region such as the Middle East, the fam-

ily, despite the evolving social, economic, and political context, continues
to be an important, all-pervasive institution.
Notwithstanding differences between the approximately two dozen Arab and

non-Arab countries in the Middle East, the family’s impact is still great on
classes, income and educational levels, members of different faiths, and
among rural and urban inhabitants. Generally, family life is shaped for the
younger generation by the older generation, and relations between the sexes
are still governed considerably by strict family codes.
Middle Eastern family members place greater value on the integrity, pride,
and prestige of the family than is true of family members in the West. Thus,
there is more respect for parents by children, and family ties are stronger. Sex
roles of family members are more clearly defined, and greater stress is placed
on both premarital chastity for girls and postmarital fidelity for women. Pre-
marital sex among girls is seen as dishonoring girls’ families, while marital in-
fidelity is seen as dishonoring husbands’ as well as wives’ families. Tradi-
tionally, it has behooved girls’ fathers or older brothers to sanction female
family members whom they believe to be wayward—in extreme cases, by kill-
ing them. Such immutable family tradition is often reinforced by a strict in-
terpretation of Qur$anic law, as is done by Muslim fundamentalists.
The fact that marriage in Middle Eastern countries is a union of two fami-
lies rather than of two individuals, as in the West, is demonstrated at every
step: in the selection of brides, which is often performed by parents to main-
tain families’ status; in the determination of the bride price; in betrothal and
wedding ceremonies; and in the raising of children, sickness, and funerals.
Obviously, these traditional family attitudes and rituals have weakened among
modernized, often Westernized, well-educated, upper-income, urban families
and their emancipated women family members.
Kinship and Genealogy As in the West, descent among Middle Eastern

families is patrilineal—that is, it is determined through the male line. Middle
Eastern societies are both patrimonial and distinctly male dominated. Espe-
cially in rural areas, they are also patrilocal—that is, married couples tradi-
538
tionally go to live in husbands’ fathers’ households. In such an extended fam-

ily arrangement, households often consist of a man, his wife, his unmarried
sons and daughters, and his married sons with their wives and children. In
more evolved city environments, the nuclear family, as in the West, has be-
come more commonplace.
While the extended family satisfies some of the economic, security, and
emotional needs of its members, it also creates occasions for intergenera-
tional conflict. Despite the fact that Islam tolerates polygamy, cases of polyg-
amy had become rare by the twenty-first century, eliminating this potential
additional source of tension. As the outer world impinges increasingly on tra-
ditional family values, young people try to elude the stifling patriarchal grip
by migrating to a distant, anonymous, and more liberal urban environment
and, in many cases, abroad.
The birth of male children is marked by elaborate celebrations, because
they are expected to perpetuate family tradition and are considered greater
and more secure economic assets than girls. Despite some changes, women
are still generally subordinate to men. Family judgment, especially in the vil-
lages, is severe, and deeds considered improper often weigh more heavily
than meritorious acts.
The Evolving Family Under the impact of some industrialization, urban-

ization, conscription and army life, improved communications, and the pro-
vision of some kind of social security by governments or other organiza-
tions—no matter how rudimentary—individuals are no longer as willing to
be subordinated to parents, uncles, aunts, and other older family members as
they were previously. Moreover, with the centralization of governmental
power, persons are beginning to show greater loyalties to the nation and per-
haps less to families. Mobility, the demands of revolution and war, and the
emergence of the modern interdependent world are increasingly propelling
individuals in this direction.
Finally, the changing status of Middle Eastern women, who are now better
educated and more likely to work outside the home and participate in eco-
nomic and even political life than in earlier times, also helps to explain the
changes in traditional family values. Thus, more women now have a say in the
choice of their spouses, as parents’ unilateral early determination of spouses
for their children has become less common. Divorce, which has become wide-
spread, is no longer the exclusively male prerogative that it once was. In short,
the Middle Eastern family is in a state of transition.
Family Values Changes in the Middle Eastern family should not be exag-
gerated. Generally speaking, the family is still the premier institution in soci-
ety. Consequently, family values continue to involve the frequently unques-
tioned authority of male heads of households as well as the lingering practice
of endogamous marriage—that is, marriage within the extended family. Even
the payment of a bride price by grooms or their families, while less frequent,
539
is still practiced. Most importantly, while fundamental values of North Ameri-

cans include individualism, freedom, equal rights and equal opportunities,
and the chance to realize individual goals, Middle Easterners focus on the im-
portance of the group and hierarchy. Respect for elders, the separateness of
sex roles, the complementariness of social roles, and the ethic of sacrifice to
the family are still strong. Such cohesive kinship relations have often given
Middle Eastern communities a relatively unified view of the outside world.
In this scheme of things, Islam has contributed to the strengthening of
family institutions through its detailed guidance of family practice and its le-
gal and moral authority. Islam and the family have, in fact, helped to stabilize
Middle Eastern societies, which have witnessed much turmoil since World
War II.
In the United States, with over two million immigrant families from the
Middle East, and Canada, with over a hundred thousand, family values con-
tinue to be strong among the first resettled generation. However, as the sec-
ond and subsequent generations have become more assimilated as they learn
English in the schools and experience other socializing factors, original fam-
ily values have tended to become diluted among Middle Easterners. Thus, the
younger generation, whose members are more “Americanized” than their
parents and who are concerned with their individuality and rights, no longer
tend to return to the Middle East to marry spouses selected for them by their
families. Moreover, they often marry spouses from outside their ethnic groups.
Among the younger generation, the nuclear family has become the norm.
Young people are also not as wont to send remittances to family members in
the Middle East as earlier generations of immigrants have been. Such fund
transfers, whether their purpose is to buy land, build a home, purchase appli-
ances, or cover the bride price, have in some cases been a significant source of
revenue for recipient local economies.
A somewhat analogous impact of environment on family may be found
among the fifty thousand or so Ethiopian Jews (Falashas) who were airlifted
to Israel during the 1980’s. The changes that have taken place among the
Falashas are twofold. The internal structure of the family has been reorga-
nized, as parental authority, age, and gender have all acquired new contexts
and meaning, and the family’s external borders have been redrawn, as many of
its functions have been taken over by other religious and secular institutions.
The predominance of Muslim families among Middle Eastern immigrants
in North America is essentially a post-World War II phenomenon. Earlier
groups of immigrants, which included large groups of people who belonged
to an array of Middle Eastern Christian sects and a few Jews who came to
North America during the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth cen-
turies, tended to be more Westernized than today’s emigrants, bilingual from
the start, and subject to less stringent family rules. They therefore found it
less difficult to assimilate than the later waves of Muslim immigrants.
Peter B. Heller
540
Further Reading
York: Olive Branch Press, 2005. Collection of interviews with Muslim immi-
grants to North America.
Dumas, Firoozeh. Funny in Farsi: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America.
New York: Villard, 2003. Lighthearted reflections of life in the United
States by a young Iranian immigrant.
Identity in the United States. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004. Study
of the special problems faced by Arab and other Muslim Americans in the
aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that turned many
Americans against Arab immigrants.
Hassoun, Rosina J. Arab Americans in Michigan. East Lansing: Michigan State
University Press, 2003. Study of one of the largest concentrations of Arab
immigrants in North America.
Kaldas, Pauline, and Khaled Mattawa, eds. Dinarzad’s Children: An Anthology of
Contemporary Arab American Fiction. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas
Press, 2004. Collection of short stories focusing on themes of great interest
to immigrant Arab children.
Marvasti, Amir B., and Karyn D. McKinney. Middle Eastern Lives in America.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Study of Middle Eastern families liv-
ing in the United States.
Moaveni, Azadeh. Lipstick Jihad: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America and
American in Iran. New York: Public Affairs, 2005. Autobiography of an Ira-
nian immigrant.
Nordquist, Joan, comp. Arab and Muslim Americans of Middle Eastern Origin: So-
cial and Political Aspects—A Bibliography. Santa Cruz, Calif.: Reference and
Research Services, 2003. Comprehensive bibliography of diverse aspects of
Middle Eastern immigrants.
Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2005. Study of the special chal-
lenges faced by Arab immigrants in the United States.
Westheimer, Ruth, and Steven Kaplan. Surviving Salvation: The Ethiopian Jew-
ish Family in Transition. New York: New York University Press, 1992. Study of
Falasha Jews.

Arab immigrants; Iranian immigrants; Israeli immigrants; Jews and Arab
Americans; Muslims.
541
Migrant superordination
Migrant superordination
Definition: Process whereby immigrant groups of outsiders subdue the na-
tive peoples of territories
Immigration issues: Native Americans; Sociological theories
Significance: The classical form of migrant superordination is colonization,

in which an immigrant group uses force to dispossess the indigenous
group of land, resources, or work.
The superordinate/subordinate relationships that result from migrant super-

ordination processes can take economic, political, and cultural forms. Such re-
lationships are characterized by the institutionalization of dominant-minority
relations in which the migrants enjoy disproportionate power, resources, and
prestige. The power relationship is then justified by a system of beliefs that ra-
tionalizes the superiority of the immigrant group in relation to the indige-
nous people.
Reactions to migrant superordination on the part of the indigenous peo-
ples may range from physical resistance and rebellion to accommodation and
assimilation. Historical examples of migrant superordination include the Eu-
ropean conquest of Native Americans in the Western Hemisphere and of Afri-
cans in South Africa.
M. Bahati Kuumba
Further Reading
See also British as dominant group; Immigrant advantage; Indigenous

superordination.
Migration
Definition: Movement of peoples from one region to another
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; European im-

migrants; Refugees; Sociological theories
Significance: Immigration—inward migration—and emigration—outward

migration—are two of the primary processes (alongside fertility and mor-
542
Migration
tality) that influence a population’s ethnic and racial composition and

that create shifts in intergroup relations. The reasons why peoples migrate
vary from region to region and era to era.
Migration simply consists of the movement of people from one place to an-
other. Migration can be internal (within a country) or international, and
both types can have significant impacts. Immigration (the movement into a
new country) and emigration (movement from a country) are forms of inter-
national migration. Net migration rate is the difference between the rate of
immigration and the rate of emigration. It is expressed as the number of peo-
ple per 1,000 who enter or leave an area during one year. Migration may have
a number of important effects, such as relieving population pressure in crowded
areas, spreading culture from one area to another, and bringing groups into
contact—and possible conflict.
Sociologists also study the experiences of immigrants in relation to preju-
dice, discrimination, and social stratification and mobility. They explore the
differing experiences of immigrants of differing ethnicities and races; such
studies have revealed much about the nature of prejudice and about the dis-
parity between the ideology and the reality of American life. A look at various
aspects of immigration to the United States allows an examination of these
processes at work in the real world.
Since the sixteenth century, most immigrants to North America have come
for similar reasons: to escape persecution, to find economic opportunities,
and to enjoy the freedoms available in the United States. Yet despite the tra-
ditional emphasis on the forces that pushed people out of their countries of
origin and the separate forces that pulled them toward the United States, a
number of studies, such as David M. Reimers’s Still the Golden Door (1985), em-
phasize structural forces—economic and political—that have influenced
population movements.
Immigration Patterns Many studies of immigration to the United States

identify two massive waves of immigration between 1820 and 1914. The first
decades of the nineteenth century brought increasing numbers of immi-
grants; 151,000 arrived during the 1820’s, nearly 600,000 during the 1830’s,
more than 1 million during the 1840’s, and 2.3 million during the 1850’s.
Many were Irish Catholics escaping political persecution and famine and
Germans fleeing political upheavals. These “old immigrants” came to cities
on the East Coast; some moved inland to the farmlands of the Great Plains.
“New immigrants” were those from eastern and southern Europe who ar-
rived between the 1880’s and World War I. This second period of immigra-
tion far surpassed the earlier waves in numbers, rising from 788,000 in 1872
to 1,285,000 in 1907. By 1914 nearly 15 million immigrants had arrived in the
United States, many from Austria-Hungary, Italy, Russia, Greece, Romania,
and Turkey. The federal Dillingham Commission (1907) regarded this group
as poor, unskilled, and mostly male, and its report reinforced prejudices
543
Migration
about eastern and southern Europeans. It concluded that these immigrants

would be more difficult to assimilate into American society. As the children or
grandchildren of immigrants became indistinguishable from other Ameri-
cans, however, the concept of American society as a “melting pot” into which
many nationalities merged into one, took hold.
Often invisible in early immigration studies were the numbers of Africans
and Latin Americans who had not come voluntarily to the United States. Afri-
cans were forcibly brought to the United States as slaves. Many Mexicans did
not technically immigrate but were absorbed into the United States when
lands from Texas to California were conquered in the Mexican War (1846-
1848). These groups needed to adapt to a new nation and a new culture, as
did European immigrants, but they faced both discrimination and a lack of
understanding about their circumstances. Asian immigrants formed another
group that was long invisible in immigration histories. Chinese men were im-
ported as cheap labor to build the railroads during the mid-nineteenth cen-
tury, and they were expected to leave when their job was done. Many Japa-
nese, Filipino, and Korean immigrants came first to Hawaii as agricultural
laborers, and some moved on to California.
Reasons for Migration Some structural reasons for emigration and im-
migration have not changed greatly over the last three hundred years. Many
individuals have come to North America to escape religious or political perse-
cution. Early refugees in this category included the English Pilgrims and
French Huguenots. Later religious groups came from Norway, Holland, and
European immigrants arriving at the federal government’s immigrant reception center on Ellis Is-
land, in New York Harbor, around 1912. (Library of Congress)
544
Migration
Russia, among them Jews and Mennonites. From the early nineteenth cen-
tury to the present, immigrants have come because of economic changes in
their native lands and opportunities in the United States.
The enclosure movement in England and western Europe, which began in
the eighteenth century, forced many peasants off the land. They sought new
land in America. Factories brought ruin to skilled artisans, who came to the
United States hoping to open workshops. Many Europeans and Asians also
came to escape political turmoil. Revolutions in 1830 and 1848 in Europe,
and the Taiping Rebellion in China in 1848, led refugees to seek safety in the
United States. Twentieth century upheavals such as World War II, the Cuban
Revolution, repression in Southeast Asia, and civil wars in Lebanon and El
Salvador have continued to bring refugees to the United States.
Immigrants and U.S.-Born Americans Immigrants and refugees have

not settled equally in all regions of the United States. Large immigrant com-
munities in California, New York, and Florida have led to the need for gov-
ernment services in many languages. Students in schools speak Vietnamese,
Spanish, Korean, Ethiopia’s Amharic, Haitian Creole, and a number of Chi-
nese dialects. Many require courses in English as a second language. Courts
need to provide translators, and social service agencies struggle to communi-
cate with many immigrant groups.
Some Americans have responded to foreigners with resentment. Some
states and localities have passed laws declaring English to be the only official
language. Sociologists studying immigration, however, have found that the
large number of immigrants has led to a gradual shift in the population of the
United States and its culture. Television stations around the country broad-
cast programs in many languages. Spanish-speaking markets in particular
represent many new business opportunities, and large American companies
are beginning to offer advertisements in Spanish.
Americans have been proud of their heritage of immigration yet ambiva-
lent about immigrant groups who have come to the United States. Federal
legislation has expressed the varying reactions of Americans toward immi-
grants and immigration over time. Before 1820 there were no laws requiring
lists of passengers arriving in the United States. Immigrants brought skills
and talents that were needed by the new country, and they were welcomed.
Non-British immigrants during the early nineteenth century, however, did
experience discrimination. Irish Catholics and German immigrants, whose
religion or language was different from that of the majority, faced ridicule
and were stereotyped as drunkards or dullards. Asian immigrants faced racial
prejudice, and Chinese people were eventually barred from immigrating to
the United States.
Despite mixed reaction to foreigners, the first federal immigration law was
not passed until 1875. In that year prostitutes and convicts were prohibited
from entering as immigrants. Additional exclusions for lunatics and idiots
were added later.
545
Migration
Japanese immigrants awaiting processing at the federal government’s immigrant reception center
on San Francisco Bay’s Angel Island during the 1920’s. (National Archives)
By the 1880’s, increasing immigration from areas outside northern Eu-

rope, the closing of the frontier, and increasing urbanization led to attempts
to control immigration. Some Americans claimed that southern and eastern
Europeans were replacing American stock and that immigration produced a
declining birthrate among Americans. Others were more worried about
Asian immigrants. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 specifically denied en-
try to Chinese people, while the Forant Act (1885) made it unlawful for em-
ployers to import aliens to perform labor in the United States. This law was
aimed at large companies who were importing eastern Europeans to fill low-
wage jobs instead of hiring American labor, and it reflected suspicion that
immigration caused wages to decline. The Immigration Act of 1917 barred
Asians not by nationality, but by excluding geographically any immigrants
from East or South Asia.
546
Migration
Immigration to the United States was regulated for most of the twentieth
century by the Immigration Act of 1924, which reflected the nation’s desire
to encourage European immigration and discourage non-Western immi-
grants. This law established a series of quotas for immigrants from all coun-
tries except the Western Hemisphere. Larger quotas were assigned to coun-
tries whose citizens were more traditionally identified with the American
population. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 tightened the
quota system.
Immigration Reform A significant change in United States policy toward

immigration came with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. This law
removed strict quotas and Asian exclusion. Instead, it created preferences for
persons with certain skills and gave priority to people with immediate family
in the United States. The consequences of this legislation led to greater
changes in immigration than were anticipated. By 1974, for example, foreign-
born physicians made up 20 percent of all medical doctors in the United
States. The “brain drain” from developing countries continued, as scientists,
engineers, and scholars sought better conditions and higher salaries in the
United States. The law also brought increasing non-European immigration,
as family members petitioned to bring relatives from Asia, Africa, and Latin
America.
The increasing number of undocumented immigrants in the United States
has led to calls for policing the U.S. border with Mexico more efficiently and
for penalties for employers of illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants have
been accused of stealing jobs from United States citizens, draining social ser-
vices, and changing the very nature of American society. In 1986 the Immigra-
tion Reform and Control Act attempted to resolve these issues for many ille-
gal immigrants. Those who could show permanent residency in the United
States since 1982 could become legal residents. Employers who hired illegal
immigrants were to be fined, and additional funds were appropriated for
stronger immigration enforcement.
Immigration reforms have continued, showing the changing response of
American society over time. The Kennedy-Donnelly Act of 1988 permitted a
lottery to provide visas for permanent resident status, and the 1990 Immi-
gration Act raised annual immigration ceilings and ended restrictions on
homosexuals, communists, and people with acquired immune deficiency syn-
drome (AIDS); it also granted safe haven status for Salvadorans. This law was
not without opposition from those who feared that disease or undesirable
ideas would be spread by immigrants.
Refugees Refugees have become an increasingly important part of popu-

lation movements. Emigration from countries experiencing conflict has in-
creased in the twentieth century, and the United States has traditionally
thought of itself as a nation receptive to the oppressed. The need to resettle
large numbers of eastern European refugees after World War II was rec-
547
Migration
ognized by the Refugee Relief Act of 1953. During the 1980’s the church-
sponsored sanctuary movement broke immigration laws by providing asylum
for Salvadorans who feared deportation by immigration authorities enforc-
ing strict refugee policies.
The impact of immigration on American society has continued to chal-
lenge cherished concepts and ideologies and to highlight prejudices. The
idea of the United States as an open door, a place where people from all lands
can find a haven, is still shared by many. Since the 1980’s, however, this ideal
has faced considerable challenges. The large numbers of Central Americans,
Asians, and Haitians seeking asylum in the United States has led to tighter
controls at borders and interdiction on the high seas.
While some scholarship, particularly since the 1980’s, has stressed struc-
tural rather than personal reasons for population movements and has chal-
lenged the concept of the melting pot, American society has continued to
mold immigrants from many nations. At the same time, American society has
changed as a result of this immigration.
James A. Baer
Further Reading
covered are the economic contributions of immigrants, government obli-
gations to address humanitarian problems, the impact of cultural diversity
on American society, bilingual education, assimilation vs. cultural plural-
ism, and enforcement of laws regulating undocumented workers.
American Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Well-written scholarly ac-
count of U.S. immigration from the colonial period through the 1980’s.
many, and Japan.
548
Model minorities
Roleff, Tamara, ed. Immigration. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Collec-
tion of articles arguing opposing viewpoints on different aspects of immi-
gration, such as quotas and restrictions, revolving around questions of
whether immigrants have a positive or negative impact on the United
States.
haven Press, 2004. Presents a variety of social, political, and legal view-
points of experts and observers familiar with immigration into the United
States.
Yans-McLaughlin, Virginia, ed. Immigration Reconsidered. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990. Collection of essays and theories of immigration,
approaches to comparative research, and immigrant networks.

1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; History of U.S. immigration; Illegal
aliens; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immigration “crisis”; Immi-
gration law; Justice and immigration; Undocumented workers.
Model minorities
Definition: Members of minority groups that have attained exceptional edu-
cational and economic success and have achieved high degrees of assimila-
tion into a dominant society
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Chinese immigrants; Japanese immi-

grants; Refugees; Stereotypes
Significance: In the United States, the term “model minority” has most of-
ten been applied to Asian Americans, notably Japanese and Chinese Amer-
icans.
The concept of the model minority has been studied and debated since the
1960’s, when the term first appeared. Its validity has been both defended and
attacked, and the possible harmful effects of the concept as an accepted and
unquestioned stereotype have been argued. Another particularly conten-
tious issue is that the suggestion that certain minorities are “models” implic-
itly contains the opposite idea: Other minorities are less than “models” and
are perhaps even deficient in some way.
549
Model minorities
Definition and History of the Term A so-called model minority is any

minority group (typically of non-European background) that does well de-
spite having faced discrimination. The criteria by which a minority group is
judged as doing well or not doing well vary, but they have included average
family income; success in entrepreneurship; children’s educational achieve-
ment (for recently settled groups); and extent of symptoms of deviance or
social pathology. The higher the first three, and the lower the last one, the
likelier a group is to be considered a model minority. Since every ethnic or
minority group in the United States has produced at least a few high achievers
and at least a few failures and criminals, social scientists’ judgments of ethnic
group success or failure are always statements of averages; they are often
based on census data.
The term first appeared in an article in The New York Times Magazine of
January 9, 1966, entitled “Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” by Ameri-
can sociologist William Petersen. Before World War II, Petersen points out,
those Japanese Americans born in Japan could neither own land in California
nor become naturalized American citizens; their American-born children
(the nisei) were barred from many types of employment. During World
War II, Japanese Americans living in the Pacific coast states were herded into
internment camps. Yet in the two decades after World War II, Japanese Ameri-
cans achieved a level of education higher than that of white Americans; a
level of family income at least equal to that of whites, and a level of social pa-
thology (such as juvenile delinquency) lower than that of whites. Hence,
Petersen calls Japanese Americans “our model minority.”
In Japanese Americans: The Evolution of a Subculture (1969), Harry L. Kitano,
a Japanese American sociologist, also uses the term “model minority,” ac-
knowledging its origin with Petersen. Kitano expresses ambivalence about
the term, which he regards as an ethnocentric white majority’s view of a racial
minority. Yet, like Petersen, Kitano ascribes the economic success of Japanese
Americans after World War II to ethnic Japanese cultural values.
Model Groups Japanese Americans are not the only Asian American eth-
nic group that has been noted by social scientists for its level of achievement
since the 1960’s. Chinese Americans have also been so identified. The busi-
ness success of both Chinese and Japanese Americans has been attributed by
some sociologists and historians to ethnic cultural values, as exemplified by
the rotating credit systems that immigrants established to help provide one
another with funds to start businesses. Korean business success has been simi-
larly explained. The academic success of Indochinese refugee schoolchil-
dren has been ascribed to the congruence of the refugees’ Confucian ethic
with the ethic of the American middle class. Louis Winnick, a scholarly expert
on urban neighborhoods, went so far as to lump all Asian Americans together
as a model minority.
Some non-Asian groups have been viewed as model minorities as well. Dur-
ing the early 1970’s, post-1959 Cuban refugees were praised in the mass me-
550
Model minorities
dia for having overcome adversity

quickly. Thomas Sowell, a black con-
servative intellectual, asserts that
British West Indian immigrants
(who are mainly black) outperform
native-born black Americans eco-
nomically and educationally. Simi-
larly, Ivan Light argued in 1972
that British West Indian immigrants
do better in small business than
native-born black Americans; they
do so, he said, because of their
rotating credit system. Writing in
1993, two journalists (white New
Yorker Joe Klein and Haitian émi-
gré Joel Dreyfuss) contended that
Haitian immigrants exhibit fewer
social pathologies and more signs
of economic and educational ad-
vance than native-born black Amer-
icans. Social scientist Kofi Apraku
Students of a Japanese-language school in Sacra-
has described post-1965 African im- mento, California, around 1910. A long tradition of
migrants (such as refugees from strong family support for education has contrib-
Ethiopia) as above average in oc- uted to the image of Asian Americans as “model mi-
cupational and entrepreneurial at- norities.” (Sacramento Ethnic Survey, Sacramento
tainment. Archives and Museum Collection Center)
Sociological Viewpoint Sociologists who employ or support the model

minority concept usually adhere to the assimilation model of interethnic rela-
tions. According to this theoretical model, the ultimate destiny of any Ameri-
can ethnic or minority group is to climb upward into the broad middle class.
Such thinkers tend to see the progress of any ethnic or minority group as a
function of its cultural values rather than of the extent of the discrimination
it suffers. The relative slowness of any particular group to overcome poverty
and win the acceptance of the majority is ascribed, at least in part, to that
group’s cultural values; hence, one can regard some minorities as “models”
and others as less exemplary.
Such structural theorists as sociologist Stephen Steinberg, by contrast, ar-
gue that it is not cultural deficiencies that retard minorities’ progress but dis-
criminatory barriers erected by the majority. These barriers can be far more
widespread and insidious than is first apparent. Such theorists also contend
that the seemingly miraculous progress of some model minorities can be ex-
plained by the social class background of the immigrants and by the opportu-
nity structure that they found upon arrival rather than by any alleged superi-
ority of those minorities’ cultural values.
551
Model minorities
Implications The model minority concept has most often been applied in
discussions of the relative success of certain Asian ethnic immigrant groups in
the United States. The term has engendered much debate because of its im-
plicit criticism of other groups—if these “model” groups could succeed, it
suggests, then others should be able to as well. This implication then leads to
the question: If certain groups cannot succeed as well as others in American
society, where does the problem lie—with discrimination, with the attitudes
of the dominant culture, or with the cultural attributes and attitudes of the
minority groups themselves?
The model minority concept has surfaced repeatedly in debates over the
status of African Americans, the minority group that has been in the United
States the longest but that has arguably assimilated least effectively. During
the late 1950’s and the 1960’s, many white Americans felt anxieties about the
Civil Rights movement; the urban unrest of the late 1960’s exacerbated fears
and uncertainties about the future of race relations. Then, during the late
1970’s and 1980’s, white resentment of affirmative action programs, which
primarily benefited African Americans, grew. At the same time, there was
some bewilderment that inner-city black poverty persisted despite affirmative
action. The model minority concept, with its evidence of Asian American suc-
cess, seemed to suggest that such programs might be, or should be, unneces-
sary.
Hence, from 1966 onward, the notion of Asian Americans as a model mi-
nority found receptive ears among conservative white Americans. By the mid-
dle and late 1980’s, it was being purveyed in a speech by President Ronald
Reagan (in 1984), in magazine articles, and on television news programs
(which placed special emphasis on the scholastic achievements of Asian
American youth). Although most African Americans during the 1980’s re-
sented being compared unfavorably with Asian Americans, some conserva-
tive black intellectuals, Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and Shelby Steele among
them, defended the concept and pointed to Asian American success as an ex-
ample for African Americans to follow.
Controversy and Challenges Because of its use in arguments over pub-

lic policy, the model minority thesis is hotly disputed. Thus a laudatory report
on Indochinese refugee schoolchildren was criticized by sociologist Rubén
Rumbaut for having covered only the Vietnamese, Sino-Vietnamese, and Lao,
omitting data on the less successful refugees, the Hmong and the Cambodi-
ans. The overall high Asian American average in income and education,
Asian American scholars Ronald Takaki, Deborah Woo, Peter Kwong, and Ar-
thur Hu point out, hides a bipolar distribution: Chinese immigrants, for ex-
ample, include both sweatshop laborers and scientists.
Many of the Asian American youth who excel in school, it is emphasized,
are children of well-educated immigrants who either hold professional jobs
in the United States or did so in Asia; Asian immigrant teenagers from poorer,
less well-educated families are not always high achievers, and they are some-
552
Model minorities
times members of urban juvenile gangs. Asian American family incomes, it is

conceded, may equal or surpass those of whites, but only because of a larger
number of earners per family. Per capita income is less than that of whites;
moreover, Asian Americans tend to live in areas with a higher than average
cost of living, such as Hawaii, New York, and California. Also, Asian Ameri-
cans statistically must achieve higher education levels than white Americans
to equal their incomes.
Sowell’s portrait of British West Indian immigrants to the United States as
an ethnic success story has also been challenged. These immigrants, econo-
mist Thomas Boston argues in Race, Class, and Conservatism (1988), exceed
both the average British West Indian and the average native-born black Amer-
ican in educational level; hence, the superior West Indian economic perfor-
mance in the United States is no simple rags-to-riches story. Sociologist Su-
zanne Model, using census data, asserts that any West Indian socioeconomic
lead over American-born African Americans had disappeared by 1990.
If the “model” part of “model minority” has been criticized, so has the “mi-
nority” part, at least regarding Asian Americans. Although everyone agrees
that certain Asian American groups have been unjustly persecuted, some schol-
ars, such as political scientist Lawrence Fuchs, argue that no Asian American
group was ever discriminated against as consistently, or for as long a time, as
black Americans were.
Some view the Asian American model minority stereotype as potentially
harmful to Asian Americans themselves. Writing during the late 1980’s,
Takaki and Woo warned that widespread acceptance of the stereotype might
lead to governmental indifference to the plight of those Asian Americans
who are poor and to neglect of programs that would help Asian immigrants
learn English and find jobs. Takaki, worried about the loss of legitimate mi-
nority status, points to examples of low-income Asian American university stu-
dents being denied aid under educational opportunity programs. He also
thinks that the envy generated among black and white Americans by the
model minority stereotype partially explains the violent anti-Asian incidents
of the 1980’s.
Paul D. Mageli
Further Reading
Barringer, Herbert R., Robert W. Gardner, and Michael J. Levin. Asians and
Pacific Islanders in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
1993. Compares Asian Americans’ income, education, and family struc-
ture with those of other Americans.
Chua, Lee-Beng. Psycho-social Adaptation and the Meaning of Achievement for Chi-
nese Immigrants. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications, 2002. Sociological
analysis of the adaptative processes which Chinese immigrants to the
United States experience, with a close examination of traditional Chinese
belief systems.
553
Mongrelization
Gibson, Margaret A. Accommodation Without Assimilation: Sikh Immigrants in an

American High School. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1988. Exam-
ines the excellent academic performance of American-born Sikh youth in
the face of majority prejudice.
Kitano, Harry L. Japanese Americans: The Evolution of a Subculture. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969. Classic exposition of the model minority
thesis that ascribes the economic success of Japanese Americans after
World War II to specific cultural traits inherited from Japan.
Minority.” Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003. Collection of essays on a wide
variety of topics relating to cultural assimilation and the notion of “model
minorities,” with particular attention to immigrant communities in Japan
and the United States.
Louie, Vivian S. Compelled to Excel: Immigration, Education, and Opportunity
Among Chinese Americans. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2004.
Close study of the pressures within Chinese American families for children
to excel in education.
Petersen, William. Japanese Americans: Oppression and Success. New York: Ran-
dom House, 1971. Elaboration and expansion of the model minority thesis
propounded in Petersen’s 1966 article in The New York Times Magazine.
Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. Chapter titled “Breaking Silences” is an elo-
quent and easily accessible critique of the Asian American model minority
thesis.
See also Asian American education; Asian American women; Assimilation

theories; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Generational accultura-
tion.
Mongrelization
Definition: Racialist term for allegedly negative results of race mixing
Immigration issue: Nativism and racism
Significance: The term “mongrelization” was adopted by racist proponents

of immigration restriction during the early decades of the twentieth cen-
tury to dramatize their fear of the consequences of permitting unlimited
immigration into the United States.
A leading exponent of ideas about “mongrelization” was Madison Grant, a

naturalist who was a founder and president of the New York Zoological Soci-
554
Muslims
ety. In his book The Passing of the Great Race (1916), Grant classified national
and ethnic groups as “races” and arranged them in an evolutionary order,
with the “Nordic” peoples of northern and western Europe considered the
most highly evolved, and the peoples of eastern and southern Europe, espe-
cially Jews, Italians, and Slavs, ranked as markedly inferior.
Grant believed that it had been scientifically established that mental as
well as physical traits were genetically determined and could not be signifi-
cantly altered by the environment. He also believed that in any mixture, infe-
rior genes would triumph and “produce many amazing racial hybrids and
some ethnic horrors that will be beyond the powers of future anthropologists
to unravel.” Grant was sure that
the surviving traits will be determined by competition between the lowest and
most primitive elements and the specialized traits of Nordic man; his stature . . .
and his splendid fighting and moral qualities, will have little part in the resul-
tant mixture.
Milton Berman
Further Reading
1975.
Perea, Juan F., ed. Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Im-
pulse in the United States. New York: New York University Press, 1996.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Japanese immigrants; Japanese seg-

regation in California schools; Nativism; Xenophobia; “Yellow peril” cam-
paign.
Muslims
Identification: Immigrants to North America who adhere to the Islamic re-
ligion
Significance: As early as the late nineteenth century, Muslim American com-

munities of significant size and number were forming in the United States
and Canada. However, some people felt threatened by the rise of Islam in
North America, and these fears reached unprecedented levels toward the
end of the twentieth century.
555
Muslims
In March, 1998, Newsweek magazine

estimated that six million Muslim
Americans were living in the United
States. It found that 42 percent of
these Muslims were African Ameri-
cans, 24.4 percent were South Asian
Americans, 12.4 percent were Arab
Americans, and 21.2 percent were
of other ancestry. According to that
article, although the Muslim com-
munity faces many hostile stereo- Image Not Available
types, it had enough political clout
for First Lady Hillary Rodham Clin-
ton to host a Ramadan party for
Muslims, who overwhelmingly sup-
ported her husband over Senator
Robert Dole during the 1996 presi-
dential election.
Newsweek found that the children
of Muslim immigrants were adopt-
ing mainstream American ways. Mus-
lim women have active mosque and professional roles, and some young peo-
ple are dreaming of becoming Muslim American politicians. Muslims actively
opposed the U.S. bombing of Iraq, and the American Muslim Council orga-
nized a lobbying campaign against this bombing.
In December, 1997, the Muslim crescent and star, the Christian cross, and
Jewish Hanukkah lamps were featured in Washington, D.C., holiday displays.
However, vandals painted a swastika—the Nazi symbol—on the Muslim dis-
play. Like the Muslim symbols in the display, the religion of Islam has gained
some level of recognition and influence in the United States but has not yet
gained acceptance. Many Americans and Canadians see Islam as a threaten-
ing, foreign religion that inspires vicious acts of terrorism. This impression,
reinforced by the 1993 bombing by foreign-born Muslims of the World Trade
Center in New York, led many Americans to suspect that Muslims were be-
hind the April, 1995, bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City, Ok-
lahoma. Some committed hate crimes against innocent Muslim Americans.
Later it was determined that the Oklahoma bombings had been committed
by a non-Muslim American man, Timothy McVeigh.
By the late 1990s, many American Muslims feared that their civil rights
might be compromised if further acts of terrorism were committed in the
name of Islam. That fear was realized after the terrorist attacks on the Penta-
gon and New York City’s World Trade Center of September 11, 2001. In the
tightening of immigration rules and inroads into civil liberties that followed
those events, Muslims—and even immigrants, such as Sikhs, whom many
Americans thought looked like Muslims—suffered disproportionately.
556
Muslims
Practical Problems Being a practicing Muslim is not easy in the United

States and Canada. Muslims do not eat pork or pork products or consume al-
cohol and often find it hard to obtain meat butchered according to Islamic
tradition. Required to pray five times per day, Muslims sometimes find it diffi-
cult to fit their prayers into schedules designed for non-Muslims. Schools and
businesses generally do not recognize Islamic holidays, and not every com-
munity has a mosque. The practical problems that are experienced by devout
Muslims are in many respects similar to those experienced by Orthodox Jews.
During Ramadan (the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, which falls in
the spring), Muslims and their families fast during the day. This makes it diffi-
cult for Muslims to entertain non-Muslim business clients and social guests.
During their holiest month, observant Muslims suffer from heightened isola-
tion.
Future Projections The Muslim population in North America is increas-

ing. Muslim Americans will almost certainly outnumber Jewish Americans
within the first quarter of the twenty-first century, and the Muslim Canadian
population is also growing rapidly. Therefore, both Muslims and the larger
society have a strong interest in Muslim participation in interfaith relations.
In addition, religious scholars are beginning to document New World changes
in Islam to illustrate the impact of democracy and multiculturalism on a nearly
fourteen-hundred-year-old religious tradition.
Susan A. Stussy
Further Reading
York: Olive Branch Press, 2005. Collection of interviews with Muslim immi-
grants to North America.
visiting aliens, particularly Muslims.
Ghanea Bassiri, Kambiz. Competing Visions of Islam in the United States: A Study of
Los Angeles. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1997. Scholarly commu-
nity study by a Muslim author that covers the African American, Arab, Paki-
stani, and Iranian elements of the Los Angeles Muslim community and the
differences in belief and practice among the groups.
Identity in the United States. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2004. Exam-
ination of issues of Arab American identity and challenges to their rights
after the terrorist attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001.
Hassoun, Rosina J. Arab Americans in Michigan. East Lansing: Michigan State
University Press, 2003. Study of one of the largest concentrations of Arab
immigrants in North America.
557
Nativism
Kaldas, Pauline, and Khaled Mattawa, eds. Dinarzad’s Children: An Anthology

of Contemporary Arab American Fiction. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas
Press, 2004. Collection of short stories focusing on themes of great interest
to immigrant Arab children.
Koszegi, Michael A., and J. Gordon Melton, eds. Islam in North America: A
Sourcebook. New York: Garland, 1992. Impressive collection of essays on Is-
lam in the United States and Canada. Chapter 7 includes a useful directory
of Islamic organizations.
Leonard, Karen Isaksen. Muslims in the United States: The State of Research. New
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2003. Perhaps the most useful starting
point for further research, this study contains a historical overview of Mus-
lim immigration to the United States, as well as chapters on various aspects
of Muslim immigration and adjustment to living in America.
Marvasti, Amir B., and Karyn D. McKinney. Middle Eastern Lives in America.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Study of Middle Eastern families liv-
ing in the United States.
Nordquist, Joan, comp. Arab and Muslim Americans of Middle Eastern Origin: So-
cial and Political Aspects—A Bibliography. Santa Cruz, Calif.: Reference and
Research Services, 2003. Comprehensive bibliography of diverse aspects of
Middle Eastern immigrants.
Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press, 2005. Study of the special chal-
lenges faced by Arab immigrants in the United States.
Turner, Richard Brent. Islam in the African American Experience. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1997. Traces the development of Islam in the
United States from colonial days, when Muslim slaves tried to preserve
their religion in the African diaspora, to the present Muslim expressions of
faith in the African American community.

Arab immigrants; Asian Indian immigrants and family customs; Iranian im-
migrants; Israeli immigrants; Jews and Arab Americans; Middle Eastern im-
migrant families.
Nativism
Definition: Negative ethnocentrism, or an intense opposition to an internal
minority on the grounds of its alien connections and its apparent threat to
the dominant culture
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Discrimination; European immi-

grants; Irish immigrants; Nativism and racism
558
Nativism
Significance: In the United States, periodic upsurges of nativism have re-

sulted in immigration restrictions, attempts to force minority groups to as-
similate into Anglo-American culture, and vigilante violence against immi-
grant groups.
As a nation of immigrants, the United States has always exhibited a certain

ambivalence toward immigrants. On one hand, immigrants have been wel-
comed as a necessary addition to the labor force and as a source of economic
growth. On the other hand, they have been feared and resented because of
their alien ways and their competition for jobs and political power. Nativists,
the most outspoken critics of immigration, feared that the American way of
life, and even the republic itself, was in danger from the constant stream of
newcomers. They developed an ideology of nativism that comprised three
identifiable strains: anti-Catholic nativism; racial nativism; and antiradical na-
tivism. These three strains often overlapped in the various nativist organiza-
tions that emerged in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Anti-Roman Catholic Nativism Anti-Catholic nativism had its roots in

the religious views of the earliest English settlers in the American colonies. As
products of the Protestant Reformation in Europe, the early colonists viewed
the pope as a foreign monarch who exercised dangerous influence through
the Roman Catholic Church. The large influx of Irish Catholic immigrants
during the early nineteenth century fueled an upsurge of anti-Catholic propa-
ganda, which alleged that Irish Catholics were agents of the pope intent on un-
dermining republican institutions. During the 1830’s, inventor Samuel F. B.
Morse’s tract, Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States (1834),
which called for the formation of the Anti-Popery Union to resist the papal
plot, became required reading in many Protestant Sunday schools. In 1834,
an anti-Catholic mob burned the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, Massa-
chusetts. Ten years later, riots erupted in Philadelphia when Irish Catholics
opposed the use of the Protestant King James version of the Bible in public
schools.
The American Protective Association (APA), organized in 1887, was the
most visible manifestation of anti-Catholic nativism during the late nine-
teenth century. Its members swore never to vote for Catholic candidates, em-
ploy Catholic workers over Protestants, or join with Catholic strikers. The
APA drew strong support from workers in the midwestern and Rocky Moun-
tain states who feared competition from cheap Irish labor. By the late 1890’s,
however, as Irish and German Catholics became an important part of the
electorate, the more extreme anti-Catholic sentiment dissipated. The APA it-
self disappeared during the 1890’s.
Racial Nativism During the late nineteenth century, a racial strain of na-
tivism, cultivated by the self-professed guardians of Anglo-Saxon culture and
apparently supported by scientific research, began to be directed against im-
559
Nativism
migrant groups. Ever since colonial times, white settlers had viewed them-
selves as culturally and physically different from, and superior to, Native
Americans and African Americans. Some intellectuals adapted the biological
research of Charles Darwin to argue that certain races would inevitably tri-
umph over others because of their inherent superiority. English and Ameri-
can intellectuals confidently trumpeted the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon
“race” and its institutions, and researchers set out to “prove” their cultural as-
sumptions by measuring the cranial volumes of skulls from members of vari-
ous ethnic groups and devising crude intelligence tests. As a new wave of im-
migrants from Asia and southern and eastern Europe began to arrive, these
newcomers were quickly labeled racially inferior.
Racial nativism reached its zenith during the early twentieth century. Influ-
enced by the European eugenics movement, with its emphasis on breeding
the right racial groups, American nativists expressed alarm over the impact of
the new immigrants. Madison Grant’s widely read The Passing of the Great Race
(1916) summarized many of the racial nativist arguments. He argued that the
superior Nordic “race” was being destroyed by the influx of southern and
eastern Europeans, and warned that race mixing would result in an inferior
hybrid race and the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization. Jewish and Ital-
ian immigrants, in particular, were often singled out for criticism in nativist
publications because of their alleged racial inferiority.
Short-lived nativist newspaper published in Boston in 1852. (Library of Congress)
560
Nativism
Antiradical Nativism Immigrants also came under attack for political

reasons during the late nineteenth century. Nativist writers worried that most
immigrants came from nondemocratic societies, harbored socialist or anar-
chist sympathies, and would foment revolution in the United States. The par-
ticipation of some immigrants in the labor agitation of the period seemed to
confirm these fears of alien radicalism. Antiradical nativism intensified fol-
lowing the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the onset of an economic
crisis in the United States. Although most immigrants were not socialists,
immigrants nevertheless constituted a majority of the membership of the
American Socialist Party. During the Red Scare of 1919-1920, when many
Americans feared that a communist revolution was imminent, immigrants
and radicalism became synonymous in the public mind.
Impact on Public Policy Nativism had its most significant impact on pub-
lic policy in the area of immigration restrictions designed to discriminate
against Asians and southern and eastern Europeans. In 1882, the Chinese Ex-
clusion Act cut off further immigration by Chinese laborers. During World
War I, Congress overrode a presidential veto to enact literacy tests for all immi-
grants, which discriminated against southern and eastern Europeans who had
less access to basic education. During the 1920’s, the United States adopted a
system of quotas based on national origins for European immigration, impos-
ing a maximum annual limit of 150,000 and allocating most of the slots to
northern and western European countries. The national origins quota sys-
tem formed the basis of immigration law until it was abolished in 1965.
Richard V. Damms
Further Reading
Bennett, David H. The Party of Fear: From Nativist Movements to the New Right in
American History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988. Ex-
ploration of the evolution of nineteenth century nativism to twentieth cen-
tury conservatism.
Billington, Ray Allen. The Protestant Crusade, 1800-1860: A Study of the Origins of
American Nativism. New York: Macmillan, 1938. Classic historical work on
early nineteenth century nativism.
with an emphasis on cultural and social trends, attention to ethnic con-
flicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1955. Standard account of
American nativism after the Civil War.
561
Naturalization
Perea, Juan F., ed. Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Im-
pulse in the United States. New York: New York University Press, 1996. Collec-
tion of essays that identify a resurgence of nativism during the 1980’s and
1990’s.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Assimilation theories; Cultural plu-

ralism; Japanese immigrants; Japanese segregation in California schools;
Know-Nothing Party; Mongrelization; Sacco and Vanzetti trial; Xenophobia;
Naturalization
Definition: Process by which immigrants become citizens
Immigration issues: Chinese immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization;

Civil rights and liberties
Significance: The U.S. Supreme Court has played a critical role in determin-
ing the rights of both resident aliens, noncitizens legally living in the
United States, and undocumented aliens, noncitizens in the country ille-
gally. The Court has also influenced the rights of aliens to become citizens
and to maintain citizenship.
The U.S. Constitution touches on the definition of citizenship only indirectly

and makes no provisions for how aliens, or noncitizens, may become citizens.
Moreover, although the amendments to the Constitution enumerate rights, it
is not clear to what extent these rights apply to people who live in the United
States but are not U.S. citizens. Because the Supreme Court is entrusted with
interpreting the Constitution and establishing whether laws are consistent
with this document, it has played a critical role in determining the rights of
aliens.
Exclusion and Deportation Congress has the constitutional power to

decide which noncitizens may enter the United States and who may be ex-
cluded. During the first century of the nation’s existence, Congress made lit-
tle use of its power to restrict immigration. One of the earliest pieces of immi-
gration legislation was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which barred the
entry of Chinese laborers for a period of ten years. The Supreme Court up-
562
Naturalization
held the right of Congress to exclude an entire national group from entering
the country in Chae Chan Ping v. United States (1889) and in Fong Yue Ting v.
United States (1893).
In theory, Congress could exclude all aliens from entering the United
States because there is no constitutional right to immigration. Prior to entry,
aliens have no constitutional rights. In Chew v. Colding (1953), the Court
ruled that those who have successfully entered the country are protected by
First Amendment rights to free speech, Fourth Amendment protections
against unreasonable searches and seizures, and Fourteenth Amendment
guarantees of equal protection of the law. Outside of the United States, how-
ever, these protections do not apply. The lack of constitutional rights by aliens
seeking entry became clear in Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei (1953).
Ignatz Mezei was a Romanian citizen who was a resident of the United
States for twenty-five years. He returned to Romania to visit his mother in
1948. When he attempted to reenter the United States, first an immigration
inspector and then the U.S. attorney general ordered him excluded. He was
held on Ellis Island, which the Court ruled was “on the threshold” of U.S. ter-
ritory. His confinement there could not be considered a violation of the
Fourth Amendment because he was not in U.S. territory. The Court affirmed
this principle in United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy (1950), in which the
German wife of an U.S. citizen was denied entry into the United States and
held for months on Ellis Island.
The Knauff-Mezei doctrine, that aliens outside the United States do not
have constitutional protection, continued to be in effect, but the Court mod-
erated it somewhat in the following years. In Landon v. Plasencia (1982), the
Court ruled that an alien who has established legal resident status in the
United States does not lose that status merely by traveling overseas and may
be deported but not excluded.
Congress has consistently excluded individuals on political grounds, such
as association with a government opposed to the United States or member-
ship in a political organization thought to be opposed to U.S. interests.
Writers, artists, and intellectuals have often been among those excluded on
these grounds. In 1969 the Justice Department refused to grant a visa to the
Belgian journalist Ernest Mandel, who had been invited to speak at universi-
ties in the United States. Citing the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Court upheld
the right of Congress to determine on political grounds who can be admitted
to the country.
In deportation, a noncitizen who has already entered the United States, ei-
ther legally or illegally, is denied the right to remain and sent back to the
country of origin. The Court officially recognized the right of Congress to en-
act deportation laws in the 1892 case Nishimura Ekiu v. United States. Aliens
facing deportation enjoy more rights than those who are excluded because
the former are actually in U.S. territory. Undocumented aliens, those in the
United States illegally, make up the bulk of the deportations from U.S. soil.
Deportation proceedings are not considered trials but civil procedures, so
563
Naturalization
those being deported do not have all the safeguards given to defendants in
criminal trials.
Being an undocumented alien is in itself a reason for deportation. How-
ever, resident aliens are also subject to deportation. In Marcello v. Bonds
(1952), the Court upheld the government’s right to deport a resident alien
for violation of a marijuana law years earlier. In Galvan v. Press (1954), the
Court approved the deportation of Juan Galvan, a resident alien, for having
been a member of the Communist Party, even though it was a legal party at
the time that Galvan was a member.
Rights to Employment A number of Court rulings have affirmed the

right of aliens residing legally in the United States to employment without
discrimination by state or federal regulation. The Fourteenth Amendment to
the Constitution, ratified in 1868, requires that all states give equal protection
of the laws to all persons residing within their jurisdictions. In Yick Wo v.
Hopkins (1886), the Court struck down a San Francisco city ordinance aimed
at preventing Chinese nationals from operating laundries on the grounds
that this was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Four decades later, in Truax v. Raich (1915), the Court ruled unconstitu-
tional an Arkansas statute that limited the number of aliens that any em-
ployer could hire. Citing Yick Wo, the Court ruled that the language of the
Fourteenth Amendment included noncitizens under its protection. The
Court’s decision observed that the right to work at common occupations was
essential to the personal freedom that the amendment was intended to se-
cure. Further, it observed that the power to control immigration is given by
the Constitution to the federal government. If a state limits the opportunity
for immigrants to earn a living, the state effectively limits immigration, which
it does not have the authority to do.
The Court has permitted both state and federal governments to refuse em-
ployment to noncitizens in some circumstances. The job of police officer, for
example, may be restricted to citizens only. In Foley v. Connelie (1978), the
Court upheld a New York state law that allowed only citizens to become state
troopers. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who wrote the decision in this case,
explained that police officers are found throughout American society and ex-
ercise wide powers over those U.S. citizens who have contact with them. Simi-
larly, in Cabell v. Chavez-Salido (1982), the Court upheld a California statute
requiring probation officers and those in similar occupations to be U.S. citi-
zens. The idea that governmental positions of authority and responsibility
can be restricted on the basis of citizenship was also extended to teachers in
Ambach v. Norwick (1979). In this case, the Court gave its support to a New
York statute that prohibited giving permanent teacher certification to an
alien unless the alien demonstrated an intention to become a U.S. citizen.
In general, the Court has ruled against barring noncitizens from civil ser-
vice jobs, but it has left state and federal governments the right to exclude for-
eigners from civil service positions when there are compelling political rea-
564
Naturalization
sons to do so. In Sugarman v. Dowell (1973), the Court struck down a New York
law that allowed only citizens to get competitive civil service jobs because peo-
ple holding high-level and elective positions, who were in the most sensitive
and authoritative positions, were exempted. In Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong
(1976), the Court ruled that a regulation of the federal Civil Service Commis-
sion that prohibited noncitizens from taking civil service jobs violated the
Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal legal protection. However, the
Court also indicated that the regulation would be permissible if it came from
the president or Congress, rather than from a mere governmental agency.
The Court has distinguished between employment discrimination on the
basis of ethnic or racial background and discrimination in employment on
the basis of citizenship by private employers. Although discrimination against
noncitizens by state or federal government is usually prohibited by the Four-
teenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection, the employment policies
of private employers are not laws and therefore are not covered by this guar-
antee. In private employment, employers are prohibited from discriminating
on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin by Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. None of these prohibitions, however, keeps private
employers from discriminating on the basis of citizenship. In Espinoza v. Farah
Manufacturing Co. (1972), the Court ruled that Farah Manufacturing Com-
pany’s decision to hire only U.S. citizens was not equivalent to discrimination
on the basis of national origin because the company did employ large num-
bers of Americans of Mexican descent, the primary national origin of the
noncitizens who were refused employment.
Public Education and Public Assistance By definition, noncitizens

who are in the United States illegally do not have the right to employment.
However, the Court has issued rulings that have recognized the rights of both
resident aliens and undocumented aliens to some of the other advantages of
American society. One of the advantages of residence in the United States is
access to the U.S. system of free public education. By the early twentieth cen-
tury, free and compulsory public schools had been established in all areas of
the United States. The right of children of noncitizen immigrants to attend
these schools was widely accepted. Indeed, the “Americanization” of children
from various ethnic backgrounds was seen by Americans in many areas with
large immigrant populations as an important function of public education.
The right of children of illegal immigrants to education at the public ex-
pense was a much more controversial issue, particularly as popular concern
over illegal immigration increased from the late 1960’s onward. This issue
came before the Court in the controversial case of Plyler v. Doe (1982). A sec-
tion of the Texas Education Code allowed school districts in Texas to either
prohibit undocumented alien children from attending public schools or to
charge the families of these children tuition.
Those who opposed the Texas statute maintained that employers in the
state deliberately attracted illegal immigrant labor and that keeping undocu-
565
Naturalization
mented aliens out of the school system would help to maintain a permanently
disadvantaged and undereducated class of workers. Those who supported it
pointed out that undocumented aliens could not expect to enjoy the benefits
of a society when they were in that society illegally. They also claimed that if
the Court upheld the statute, states would be obligated to extend every public
benefit to all illegal immigrants who managed to escape capture. In its 1982
decision, the Court for the first time explicitly stated that undocumented
aliens did enjoy the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth
Amendment and that the Texas statute was therefore unconstitutional. How-
ever, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., who delivered the decision, also stated
that some public benefits can be denied to adult illegal immigrants because
adult aliens in the United States without proper documents are intentionally
breaking the law.
Although the right of resident aliens to public education has been widely
accepted, their right to public assistance has been controversial. The case
Graham v. Richardson (1971) dealt with the right of aliens to receive welfare
benefits. The petitioners in this case challenged two state statutes: an Arizona
statute requiring individuals receiving disability benefits to be U.S. citizens or
residents for a minimum of fifteen years and a Pennsylvania statute that de-
nied general assistance benefits to noncitizens. The Court ruled that the
states could not restrict to citizens the benefits of tax revenues to which aliens
had also contributed because this would violate the equal protection clause of
the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Court also observed that the fed-
eral government had the power to set policies toward immigrants. This made
it possible for Congress to restrict access of resident aliens to some welfare
benefits in 1996.
Rights of Suspected Illegal Aliens The U.S. Citizenship and Immigra-

tion Services (USCIS) is charged by Congress with regulating the movement
of aliens into the United States. This means that USCIS officers have the
power to detain, interrogate, and arrest those suspected of having entered
the United States illegally. However, the Fourth Amendment guarantees to all
those on U.S. soil—citizens or noncitizens—freedom from unreasonable
searches and seizures. Because many Americans living near the Mexican bor-
der are of Mexican or Hispanic ancestry, moreover, the duty of the USCIS
to find suspected illegal aliens raises the continual danger that Mexican or
Hispanic Americans will be placed under suspicion without justification. In
making rulings on issues in this area, the Court had to balance the duties of
immigration officers with the Fourth Amendment rights of suspected illegal
aliens.
One of the chief limitations on the detention of suspected illegal aliens re-
sulted from the case of Almeida-Sanchez v. United States (1973). In this case, the
Court ruled that immigration officials could not use roving patrols far from
the border to stop vehicles without a warrant or probable cause. This meant
that immigration officers had to be able to demonstrate that a search by a rov-
566
Naturalization
ing patrol took place either at the border or at the equivalent of a border,
such as an airport.
The practice of detaining suspected illegal aliens because of appearance
or the language they speak is a difficult matter because it can easily be seen as
discrimination against members of minority groups in the United States. The
District of Columbia circuit court, in Cheung Wong v. Immigration and Natural-
ization Service (1972), ruled that immigration officers were justified in stop-
ping and interrogating two individuals who did not speak English and who
were Chinese in appearance outside of a restaurant that was suspected of em-
ploying illegal immigrants. This issue came before the Court in United States v.
Brignoni-Ponce (1975). The Court ruled that roving patrols could stop vehicles
to question suspected illegal aliens, but they could not use appearance alone
as a justification for stopping people. Race or apparent ancestry alone was
not enough cause for an officer to detain an individual. In Brignoni-Ponce,
though, the Court did allow officers to take ancestry into consideration along
with other factors when deciding to investigate the legal status of a suspected
alien.
Naturalization and Denaturalization Resident aliens who are not

U.S. citizens may become citizens through naturalization. The conditions
under which an alien may become a citizen are determined by Congress,
Naturalization class in Chicago’s Hull-House during the early twentieth century. (University of Illi-
nois at Chicago, University Library, Jane Addams Memorial Collection)
567
Naturalization
and the power of Congress to set these conditions has been continually af-
firmed by the Supreme Court. The first Naturalization Act, passed in 1790, re-
stricted citizenship through naturalization to “free white persons” of good
character.
Before the Civil War (1861-1865), nonwhites born on U.S. soil were consid-
ered ineligible for citizenship. With the passage of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment, nonwhites born in the United States were granted U.S. citizenship, but
people who were not of European ancestry continued to be ineligible for nat-
uralization. The Court upheld this racial restriction on naturalization in the
case of Ozawa v. United States (1922). Takao Ozawa had immigrated to the
United States as a child in 1894, graduated from Berkeley High School, and
attended the University of California. When Ozawa applied for citizenship at
the U.S. District Court for the Territory of Hawaii, the court ruled that he was
qualified for citizenship in every way except one: He was not white. On ap-
peal, the Supreme Court ruled that Ozawa was not entitled to naturalization
as a U.S. citizen because he was not of European descent. Although the
United States no longer has naturalization policies that intentionally discrim-
inate on the basis of race, this is a result of legislation rather than of judicial
rulings on discrimination in naturalization.
Naturalization laws continue to require that new citizens support the basic
form of government found in the United States. Those who, during a ten-year
period before application for naturalization, were members of anarchist, com-
munist, or other organizations considered subversive may be barred from citi-
zenship. The Court placed some limitations on these political restrictions in
Schneiderman v. United States (1943).
Just as Congress determines the conditions under which individuals may
be naturalized, it also historically determined the conditions under which
they may be denaturalized, or stripped of their naturalized citizenship. Be-
fore the late 1950’s, the Court usually did not question the right of Congress
to take citizenship from the foreign born. However, in Trop v. Dulles (1958),
Chief Justice Earl Warren recognized the seriousness of denaturalization
when he observed that deprivation of citizenship could be seen as a violation
of “the principles of civilized treatment.” In Schneider v. Rusk (1964), the
Court ruled that naturalized citizens could not lose their citizenship merely
for living outside of the United States for extended periods of time. The great-
est judicial limitation on denaturalization came in Afroyim v. Rusk (1967), in
which a Polish-born citizen’s citizenship was removed for voting in an Israeli
election. The Court ruled that Congress has no constitutional power to re-
move citizenship without the voluntary renunciation of the individual con-
cerned. After this case, denaturalization has been limited to cases in which
the government can prove that a foreign-born person obtained citizenship il-
legally or fraudulently.
568
Naturalization Act of 1790
Further Reading
Washington, D.C.: Catholic Legal Immigration Network, 2002. Practical
guidebook for immigrants who wish to become American citizens.
Carliner, David, Lucas Guttentag, Arthur C. Helton, and Wade Henderson.
The Rights of Aliens and Refugees: The Basic ACLU Guide to Alien and Refugee
Rights. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990. Somewhat
dated but still useful practical handbook on the rights of noncitizens put
together by the American Civil Liberties Union.
ered is naturalization.
Jacobson, David. Rights Across Borders: Immigration and the Decline of Citizenship.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996. Sociologist’s argument
that the growth of immigrant populations in the United States and other
countries has led to the granting of rights formerly reserved to citizens. Ja-
cobson maintains that this has weakened the status of citizenship.
Canada.
wood Press, 1999. Collection of essays on a variety of naturalization issues.
Neuman, Gerald L. Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Funda-
mental Law. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996. Academic
consideration of problems in applying U.S. constitutional law to non-
citizens and discusses case law interpretations of immigrant rights.
See also Citizenship; Immigration and Naturalization Service; Immigra-

tion law; Naturalization Act of 1790.

The Law: Federal law defining rules for naturalization
Immigration issues: Citizenship and naturalization; Government and poli-

tics; Laws and treaties
569
Significance: This inaugural federal involvement in immigration—an area

previously under control of individual states—established the first uni-
form rules for naturalization.
Naturalization is the legal process by which a state or country confers its na-
tionality or its citizenship to a person after birth. In most cases, the primary
beneficiaries of naturalization are immigrants.
After the American colonies gained their independence from Great Brit-
ain in 1787, each state adopted different rules for conferring U.S. citizenship
upon its residents. President George Washington suggested that a uniform
naturalization act at the federal level was needed.
Article I, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution empowers Congress to pass uni-
form laws for naturalization. Congress exercised this power, for the first time,
when it passed “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” on
March 26, 1790. This act granted “all free white persons” with two years of res-
idence the right of citizenship. In addition, the act stated that “the children of
citizens of the U.S. that may be born beyond sea, or out of limits of the U.S.,
shall be considered as natural born citizens.”
In effect, the act created two separate classes of people: free and white citi-
zens, able to hold political office and entitled to the rights and privileges of
citizenship, and nonwhite persons, ineligible for membership in the U.S.
community. The act further reinforced the part of the Constitution that lim-
its membership in Congress to citizens who meet stipulated residence re-
quirements and the presidency to natural-born citizens. The Naturalization
Act was repealed five years later.
Stephen Schwartz
Further Reading
Helewitz, Jeffrey A. U.S. Immigration Law. Dallas: Pearson Publications, 1998.
wood Press, 1999.
See also Alien and Sedition Acts; Cable Act; Chinese Exclusion Act; Immi-
gration Act of 1917; Immigration Act of 1921; Immigration Act of 1924; Immi-
gration Act of 1943; Immigration Act of 1990; Immigration and Nationality
Act of 1952; Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965; Immigration and Natu-
ralization Service; Immigration law; Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986; Naturalization; Page law; War Brides Act.
570
NGUYEN V. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE
NGUYEN V. IMMIGRATION AND

NATURALIZATION SERVICE
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the citizenship of a child of an un-
married U.S. parent who was born abroad
Date: June 11, 2001
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization;

Court cases
Significance: In this ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a federal statute that
established different citizenship rules for persons born abroad and out of
wedlock depending on whether the father or mother was a U.S. citizen.
Tuan Anh Nguyen was born out of wedlock in Vietnam to a Vietnamese

mother and Joseph Boulais, a U.S. citizen. From the age of six, Nguyen was
raised by his father as a permanent U.S. resident. After Nguyen pled guilty to
sexually assaulting a child at the age of twenty-two, an immigration judge or-
dered him deportable. Nguyen and Boulais appealed on the basis of citizen-
ship claims to the Board of Immigration Appeals; however, they were unable
to meet the citizenship requirements for one born abroad by a citizen father
and a noncitizen mother. The appeals court for the Fifth Circuit found that
the gender distinctions in the immigration laws were unconstitutional.
By a 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court, reversed the ruling of the lower
court. In writing the opinion for the Court, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy ap-
plied the precedent of evaluating a gender-based classification with “inter-
mediate scrutiny,” meaning that the classification must serve important
governmental objectives and that any discriminatory provisions must be sub-
stantially related to those objectives. Kennedy concluded that this particular
gender-based distinction in immigration law was valid for two reasons: to en-
sure that a biological parent-child relationship exists and to ensure that the
child and citizen parent have a demonstrated opportunity to develop a mean-
ingful relationship consisting of “real, everyday ties.”
Thomas Tandy Lewis
Further Reading
2000.
law.
571
Operation Wetback

See also Amerasians; Vietnamese immigrants; War brides.
Operation Wetback
The Event: U.S. government program for the deportation of thousands of
Mexican citizens
Date: June 10-July 15, 1954
Place: California, Arizona, and Texas
Immigration issues: Border control; Government and politics; Illegal immi-

gration; Latino immigrants; Law enforcement; Mexican immigrants; Ste-
reotypes
Significance: Despite the investment of significant government resources,

Operation Wetback had little long-range impact on the number of illegal
immigrants living in the United States.
A fact of life for the nation of Mexico is the existence of a highly prosperous
colossus to the north, the United States. While there has long been a ten-
dency for Mexican workers to seek to enter the more prosperous United
States to work, the government of Mexico took a number of steps during the
1940’s and 1950’s to provide good jobs to keep workers at home. These steps
included the building of irrigation projects and factories. Most of these proj-
ects were located in northern Mexico and had the effect of drawing a large
number of workers to the border area. Jobs were not available for all who
came, and many chose to make the short trip across the border into the
United States to find work. The average annual income of workers in the
United States was more than ten times that of Mexican workers—a strong en-
ticement for Mexican laborers to emigrate to the United States, legally or ille-
gally, temporarily or on a permanent basis.
Mexican laborers who crossed the border into the United States during
the early twentieth century most often found seasonal agricultural jobs.
Starting about 1930, however, the Great Depression meant that many now-
unemployed U.S. workers were willing to do back-breaking work in the fields
for low pay. Accordingly, job opportunities for Mexicans evaporated, and
those who did not leave voluntarily often were deported. Then, in 1941, war
raised levels of employment in the United States, and as U.S. farmworkers de-
parted to enter the military or to work in war factories, Mexican workers
572
Operation Wetback
again began to enter the U.S. to do agricultural work. Most of the jobs they
found were in California, Arizona, and Texas.
The Bracero Program The U.S. and Mexican governments worked to-
gether to start a formal system called the bracero program. The program in-
volved recruitment of Mexican laborers, the signing of contracts, and the
temporary entry of Mexicans into the United States to do farmwork or other
labor. The Mexican government favored the bracero program primarily be-
cause the use of contracts was expected to guarantee that Mexican citizens
would be fairly treated and would receive certain minimum levels of pay and
benefits. The U.S. government favored this formal system because it wanted
to control the numbers of Mexicans coming into the United States and hoped
the use of contracts would make it easier to ensure that the workers left when
the seasonal work was completed. Labor unions in the United States sup-
ported the program because bracero workers could be recruited only after
certification that no U.S. citizens were available to do the work.
The bracero program worked with some success from 1942 until its discon-
tinuation in 1964. In some years, however, and in certain localities, the use of
illegal, non-bracero workers from Mexico continued. Some U.S. employers
found too much red tape in the process of securing bracero laborers, and
Mexicans crossing the Rio Grande into Texas in 1914 to escape the disorder of the Mexican Revo-
lution. The tradition of Mexican immigrants wading across the river to enter the United States gave
rise to the pejorative term “wetbacks” for undocumented Mexican immigrants. (Library of Con-
gress)
573
Operation Wetback
they also noted that bracero wage levels were much higher than the wages
that could be paid to illegal immigrants. Many Mexicans crossed the border
illegally, because not nearly enough jobs were available through the bracero
program. When the U.S. economy stumbled in 1953 and 1954, many U.S.
citizens began to speak out against the presence of illegal aliens. They com-
plained that illegal immigrants were a drain on U.S. charities and govern-
ment programs. They also claimed that the immigrants took jobs at substan-
dard wages that should go to U.S. citizens at higher wages.
When reporters first asked President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Attorney
General Herbert Brownell if they intended to enforce vigorously the immi-
gration laws, both men seemed uninterested in the issue. As popular agita-
tion increased, however, the Eisenhower administration began to develop
plans for Operation Wetback. The operation was designed to round up illegal
aliens and deport them, while forcing large farming operations to use the
limited and controlled bracero labor instead of uncontrolled and illegal alien
labor. Operation Wetback was under the overall control of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service (INS), directed by Joseph Swing, while day-to-day
operations were supervised by an official of the U.S. Border Patrol, Harlon B.
Carter.
Operation Wetback Begins Operation Wetback took its name from a

slang term first used in the southwestern United States to refer to Mexican
immigrants who swam the Rio Grande or otherwise crossed into the U.S. ille-
gally, seeking economic opportunities. The INS and its Border Patrol launched
the operation in California on June 10, 1954, relying heavily on favorable
press coverage to secure the support and cooperation of the general public.
INS officials greatly exaggerated the number of agents they had in the field
and the number of illegal aliens who had left or had been deported. Press cov-
erage in California was generally quite favorable to Operation Wetback, prais-
ing the professional attitude of Border Patrol and INS agents. On the first
day, more than a thousand persons were sent out of California on buses char-
tered by the INS. For several weeks, the number of daily deportations hovered
around two thousand. The deportees were handed over to Mexican authori-
ties at border towns like Nogales in Sonora, and the Mexican government
sent them farther south by rail, hoping to prevent any quick reentry into the
United States.
By July 15, the main phase of Operation Wetback in California was com-
plete. On that day, Border Patrol agents began their work in Texas. There,
they met stiff local opposition from powerful farm interests, who were quite
content to hire illegal aliens and pay them only half the prevalent wage
earned by U.S. or bracero workers. Agents met a hostile press as well, and in
some cases had trouble securing a meal or lodging. Nevertheless, the opera-
tion resulted in the deportation by bus of tens of thousands of illegal workers
from Texas. The INS conducted smaller phases of Operation Wetback in Ari-
zona, Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, and other states. Most of the
574
Operation Wetback
illegals picked up nationwide were farmworkers, but some industrial workers

were apprehended in cities from San Francisco to Chicago.
During the operation, some complaints were registered about the conduct
of Border Patrol officers. The officers sometimes were characterized as harsh
and hateful in their actions, and they were regularly accused of harassing U.S.
citizens of Mexican ancestry. Some of these complaints seem to have been
without foundation, particularly in Texas, where the powerful farm interests
opposed the entire operation. On the other hand, there were a number of
documented cases of U.S. citizens who had darker skin or Hispanic surnames
being apprehended and deported to Mexico. Many of the aliens who were de-
tained were kept in camps behind barbed wire pending their deportation.
Some Mexicans and Mexican Americans spent several months hiding in ter-
ror, having quit their jobs to prevent their being apprehended at work. De-
portees had to pay for their bus passage back to Mexico, to the dismay of hu-
man rights activists, who pointed out the unfairness of making someone pay
for a trip he was being forced to take. The INS responded that the deportees
should agree that paying for a bus trip back to Mexico was preferable to prose-
cution under the immigration laws and a possible jail sentence.
Stereotypes Operation Wetback opened the door to stereotypes of Mexi-

cans in the non-Hispanic community: Some press reports implied that the
aliens were ignorant, disease-ridden union busters. As for the effectiveness of
the operation in meeting its goals, nearly 100,000 illegal immigrants were re-
turned to Mexico in the space of about three months. On the other hand, INS
claims that more than one million illegal immigrants fled to Mexico on their
own rather than face arrest were grossly exaggerated. Moreover, the boost to
the bracero program given by Operation Wetback was only temporary; many
employers returned to the use of illegal workers before the end of the 1950’s.
Operation Wetback, while effective in the short term, provided no long-term
solutions to the needs of Mexican workers, U.S. employers, or those who
clamored for a more restricted U.S. border.
Stephen Cresswell
Further Reading
García, Juan Ramon. Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undoc-
umented Workers in 1954. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1978. The only
book on this subject, García’s work thoroughly reviews the background,
the deportation program, and the aftermath.
575
OZAWA V. UNITED STATES

Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. General history of the
problem of illegal immigration in the United States that includes a chapter
covering Operation Wetback and the bracero program.
Norquest, Carrol. Rio Grande Wetbacks: Migrant Mexican Workers. Albuquerque:
University of New Mexico Press, 1971. Discusses Operation Wetback in the
larger context of Mexico-United States immigration issues.
United States. Immigration and Naturalization Service. Mexican Agricultural
Laborers Admitted and Mexican Aliens Located in Illegal Status, Years Ended June
30, 1949-1967. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1968. Shows
changes in numbers of bracero workers and apprehensions of illegal Mexi-
can immigrants.
See also Border Patrol, U.S.; Bracero program; Deportation; Illegal aliens;
Latinos; Latinos and employment; Mexican deportations during the Depres-
sion; Naturalization; Undocumented workers.

The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on citizenship requirements
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization;

Court cases; Japanese immigrants
Significance: In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that Japanese aliens did
not qualify as “white” and therefore could not be naturalized as citizens.
During the early twentieth century, naturalization was under the effective
control of local and state authorities. In California and other Pacific states,
fears of the “yellow peril” or “silent invasion” of Asian immigrants were deeply
entrenched and politically exploited. In such states, citizenship had been re-
peatedly denied to both Chinese and more recent Japanese settlers, although
there were some rare exceptions. The prevailing belief among the nativist
majority was that such settlers should be ineligible for U.S. citizenship.
Background Partly to test the Alien Land Law—a California law passed in
1913 that barred noncitizens from owning land in that state—Takao Ozawa
sought U.S. citizenship in defiance of a 1906 law (U.S. Revised Statute, sec-
tion 2169) that limited naturalization to “free white persons,” “aliens of Afri-
576
can nativity,” and “persons of African descent.” Although born in Japan,

Ozawa had been educated in the United States. He was graduated from high
school in Berkeley and for three years attended the University of California.
He was aware that some issei (first-generation Japanese immigrants) had
been naturalized, even in California. Specifically, Ozawa may have known of
Iwao Yoshikawa, the first Japanese immigrant to be naturalized in California.
Yoshikawa had arrived in San Francisco from Japan in 1887. A law clerk in his
homeland, he had studied U.S. law in his adopted country and served as a
court translator. In 1889 he began the naturalization process, which, presum-
ably, was completed five years later, although there is no extant record of his
naturalization. His case was publicized because it broached such issues as
mandatory citizenship renunciation and the legality of dual citizenship.
Regardless of Ozawa’s knowledge of Yoshikawa, on October 16, 1914, Ozawa
applied for U.S. citizenship before the district court for the territory of Ha-
waii. He argued that he had resided in the United States and its territory of
Hawaii for a total of twenty years, had adopted the culture and language of his
host country, had reared his children as Americans in heart and mind, and
was, by character and education, wholly qualified for naturalization.
The district court ruled against Ozawa on the grounds that his Japanese
ethnicity denied him access to naturalization. Ozawa then took his case to the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which passed it to the U.S. Supreme Court
for instruction. In turn, the Supreme Court upheld the laws that in effect de-
clared Ozawa ineligible for citizenship.
Rather than question the justice of the racial restrictions on naturaliza-
tion, the opinion limited its focus to clarifying the meaning of the term “white
persons” and distinguishing between “Caucasian” and “white person,” deter-
mining that the latter, while a more inclusive term than the former, is not so
inclusive as to include persons of Asian extraction. It concluded that
a person of the Japanese race is not a free white person, within the meaning of
U.S. Rev. Stat. § 2169 [the 1906 law], limiting the provisions of the title on natu-
ralization to aliens being free white persons, and to aliens of African nativity,
and to persons of African descent, and therefore such Japanese is not eligible to
naturalization as a United States citizen.
In tracing the history of the naturalization laws, the Court attempted to

demonstrate that all statutes preceding the 1906 act contested by Ozawa had
the same intent: the selective admission to citizenship based on the interpre-
tation of “white,” not as a racial appellation but as a reflection of character. It
argued that the words “free white persons” did not indicate persons of a par-
ticular race or origin, but rather that they describe “personalities” and “per-
sons fit for citizenship and of the kind admitted to citizenship by the policy of
the United States.” According to that doctrine, any non-African alien, if de-
sired by Congress, might be deemed “white.” Thus, the Court reasoned,
577
when the long-looked-for Martian immigrants reach this part of the earth, and
in due course a man from Mars applies to be naturalized, he may be recognized
as white within the meaning of the act of Congress, and admitted to citizenship,
although he may not be a Caucasian.
Regardless of this race disclaimer, however, the Court, in reasoning through

its arguments, distinguished between “whites” (all Europeans, for example)
and “nonwhites” (such as the Chinese) on ethnic grounds pure and simple.
The decision throughout sanctioned racial biases that assumed that an indi-
vidual’s character was in some way delimited by his or her racial heritage. For
example, at one point it provided a formulaic approach to determining citi-
zenship eligibility for persons of mixed blood, supporting the idea, widely ob-
served, that in order to be construed as white, a person must be “of more than
half white blood.” Clearly, the decision upheld the seriously flawed assump-
tion that character and racial heritage were inextricably interrelated.
Nativist Sentiment The Supreme Court’s ruling reflected the prevailing

nativist bias against Asian immigrants, an attitude that was reflected in both
law and policy through the first half of the twentieth century. In fact, no more
formidable barriers to citizenship were erected than those facing the issei
(first-generation Japanese), Chinese, and other Asian immigrants. In 1924,
an isolationist Congress enacted an immigration act placing numerical re-
strictions on immigrants allowed into the United States based on national
origin. One provision of the Immigration Act of 1924, also known as the
Johnson-Reid Act, excluded immigrants ineligible for naturalization. Its obvi-
ous aim—to bar entry of Japanese aliens—quickly led to a deterioration in
the diplomatic relations between Japan and the United States.
The plight of Japanese already in the United States also worsened in the
anti-Asian climate. In separate rulings, the Supreme Court went so far as to
revoke citizenship that had been granted to some issei. In 1925, it even de-
nied that service in the armed forces made issei eligible for naturalization,
overturning a policy that had previously been in effect. Not only were issei
barred from naturalization; in many states, “alien land laws” prohibited them
from owning land and even entering some professions.
That codified prejudice partly accounts for but does not justify the terrible
treatment of Japanese Americans during World War II, when 112,000 of
them, including 70,000 nisei (persons of Japanese descent born in the United
States), were rounded up and incarcerated in detention centers that bore
some grim similarities to the concentration camps of Europe. It was not until
the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 that the long-
standing racial barriers to naturalization finally came down.
John W. Fiero
Further Reading
1975. Traces the origins of anti-immigrant movements in America, relating
578
Page law
the xenophobic tradition to the exclusionist laws and practices of the in-
clusive period.
Hosokawa, Bill. Nisei: The Quiet Americans. New York: William Morrow, 1969.
Good general study of Japanese Americans and their struggle against legal
and social discrimination. Some photographs; no bibliography or notes.
O’Brien, David J., and Stephen Fugita. The Japanese American Experience. Bloom-
ington: Indiana University Press, 1991. Scholarly study with focus on the le-
gal and social problems confronting Japanese Americans before World
War II and their rapid acculturation in its wake.
Takaki, Ronald T. Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans.
Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. Excellent and sensitive overview of Asian Amer-
ican history, with extensive notes and photographs.
Wilson, Robert Arden, and Bill Hosokawa. East to America: A History of the Japa-
nese in the United States. New York: William Morrow, 1980. General history of
Japanese migration to North America. Appendices provide census statis-
tics, text of an exclusionist law, and a letter to President Woodrow Wilson
pleading the issei cause.
Yuji, Ichioka. “The Early Japanese Immigrant Quest for Citizenship: The Back-
ground of the 1922 Ozawa Case.” Amerasia 4, no. 2 (1977): 12. Brief ac-
count of the reasons for Ozawa’s legal action and his desire for citizenship.
See also Citizenship; Immigration Act of 1921; Japanese immigrants; Nat-

uralization; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Page law
The Law: Federal legislation designed to prevent Asian prostitutes from en-
tering the United States
Date: March 3, 1875
tion; Illegal immigration; Laws and treaties
Significance: Designed to prohibit Chinese contract workers and prosti-
tutes from entering the United States, the Page law was eventually used to
exclude Asian women in general.
579
Page law
Chinese woman with her children and brother-in-law awaiting a streetcar in

San Francisco around 1904. The sedate black outfit worn by the woman is
typical of the dress worn by married Chinese women who wanted to distin-
guish themselves from prostitutes. (Library of Congress)
On February 10, 1875, California congressman Horace F. Page introduced

federal legislation designed to prohibit the immigration of Asian female pros-
titutes into the United States. Officially titled “An Act Supplementary to the
Acts in Relation to Immigration,” the Page law evolved into a restriction
against vast numbers of Chinese immigrants into the country regardless of
whether they were prostitutes. Any person convicted of importing Chinese
prostitutes was subject to a maximum prison term of five years and a fine of
not more than five thousand dollars.
An amendment to the law prohibited individuals from engaging in the
“coolie trade,” or the importation of Chinese contract laborers. Punishment
for this type of violation, however, was much less severe and was much more
difficult to effect, given the large numbers of Asian male immigrants at the
time. As a consequence of this division of penalties, the law was applied in a
most gender-specific manner, effectively deterring the immigration of Asian
females into the United States. Within seven years following the implementa-
580
Page law
tion of the law, the average number of Chinese female immigrants dropped
to one-third of its previous level.
Enforcement and Implementation An elaborate bureaucratic network

established to carry out the Page law’s gender-specific exclusions was a cata-
lyst for the decline in Chinese immigration rates. American consulate offi-
cials supported by American, Chinese, and British commercial, political, and
medical services made up the law’s implementation structure. Through intel-
ligence gathering, interrogation, and physical examinations of applicants,
the consulate hierarchy ferreted out undesirable applicants for emigration
and those suspected of engaging in illegal human trafficking.
This investigative activity evolved well beyond the original intent of the
law’s authors. Any characteristic or activity that could be linked, even in the
most remote sense, to prostitution became grounds for denial to emigrate.
Most applications to emigrate came from women from the lower economic
strata of society; low economic status therefore became a reason for immigra-
tion exclusion. The procedure was a complicated one. Many roadblocks were
placed in the way of prospective immigrants. Acquiring permission to emi-
grate took much time and effort. Passing stringent physical examinations
performed by biased health care officials was often impossible. Navigating
language barriers through official interviews aimed at evaluating personal
character often produced an atmosphere of rigid interrogation, bringing
subsequent denial of the right to emigrate. Such a complex system aimed at
uncovering fraudulent immigrants placed a hardship upon those wishing to
leave China.
Because Hong Kong was the main point of departure for Chinese emigrat-
ing to the United States, all required examinations were performed there
with a hierarchy of American consulate officials determining immigrant eligi-
bility. In a sense, the Page law actually expanded consulate authority beyond
any previous level.
Corruption Charges Such increased power of the consular general in

implementing the law provided an opportunity for possible abuses of power.
In 1878, the U.S. consul general in Hong Kong, John Mosby, accused his pre-
decessors of corruption and bribery. According to Mosby, David Bailey and
H. Sheldon Loring were guilty of embezzlement. Both men were accused of
setting up such an intricate system to process immigration applications that
bribery soon became the natural way to obtain the necessary permission to
do so. Mosby went on to charge that Bailey had amassed thousands of dollars
of extra income by regularly charging additional examination fees regardless
of whether an exam was performed. Mosby also accused Bailey of falsifying
test results and encouraging medical personnel to interrogate applicants in
order to deny immigration permission to otherwise legal immigrants.
Most of the allegations of corruption surrounded the fact that monies al-
lotted by the federal government for implementation of the Page law were far
581
Page law
below the amount Bailey required to run his administration of it. Given this
scenario, the U.S. government scrutinized Bailey’s conduct. No indictments
came from the official investigation, however, and Bailey, who had previously
been promoted to vice consul general in Shanghai, remained in that posi-
tion. Further examination of Bailey’s tenure in Hong Kong has suggested
that, if anything, he was an overly aggressive official who made emigration of
Chinese women to the United States a priority issue of his tenure there rather
than an opportunity for profit.
Bailey was replaced in Hong Kong by H. Sheldon Loring. Unlike his prede-
cessor, Loring did not enforce the Page law with as much vigor, allowing a
slight yet insignificant increase in the annual numbers of Chinese immi-
grants. Nevertheless, Loring did enforce the law in an efficient manner, pub-
licly suggesting that any shipowner who engaged in the illegal transport of
women would be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. Even so, Loring
was accused of sharing Bailey’s enthusiasm for the unofficial expensive de-
sign of the immigration procedure. During Loring’s tenure, questions about
his character began to surface mostly on account of his past relationships with
individuals who engaged in questionable business practices in Asia. By the
time that Mosby replaced him, such questions had become more than a nui-
sance. The new U.S. consul to Hong Kong began to describe his predecessor
as a dishonest taker of bribes. Once again, the official dynamics of such
charges brought forth an official inquiry from Washington. Like the previous
investigation of Bailey, however, this investigation produced no official indict-
ment against Loring. The only blemish concerned an additional fee that
Loring had instituted for the procuring of an official landing certificate. As
there was precedent for such a fee, Loring, like his predecessor, was exoner-
ated of all charges.
Having decided that his predecessors were indeed corrupt, yet unable to
prove it, Mosby pursued enforcement of the Page law with relentless occupa-
tion. Keeping a posture that was above accusations of corruption, Mosby per-
sonally interviewed each applicant for emigration, oversaw the activities be-
tween the consulate and the health examiners, and eliminated the additional
charges for the landing permits. In the end, the numbers of Chinese immi-
grants remained similar to those of Loring and below those of Bailey, with the
numbers of Chinese female immigrants continuing to decline. Aside from be-
ing free from charges of corruption, Mosby’s tenure in office was as authori-
tative as those of his predecessors.
Regardless of the personalities of the consulate officials in charge of imple-
menting the Page law, the results were the same: The number of Chinese who
emigrated to the United States decreased dramatically between the 1875 en-
actment of the law and the enactment of its successor, the Chinese Exclusion
Act of 1882. Furthermore, the law’s specific application to Chinese women
ensured a large imbalance between numbers of male and female immigrants
during the period under consideration. In the long run that imbalance nega-
tively affected Asian American families who had settled in the United States.
582
Page law
The barriers that the Page law helped to erect against female Chinese immi-
grants made a strong nuclear family structure within the Asian American
community an immigrant dream rather than a reality.

Cynthia Gwynne Yaudes
Further Reading
Cheng, Lucie, and Edna Bonacich, eds. Labor Immigration Under Capitalism.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Examines the development
and intent of political movements among immigrants in the United States
before World War II.
Foner, Philip, and Daniel Rosenberg, eds. Racism, Dissent, and Asian Americans
from 1850 to the Present. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1993. A docu-
mentary history that traces the political and social segregation of immi-
grants. Indicates the existence of more than one view among whites, Afri-
can Americans, and others not of Asian descent on the position of Asians
Gordon, Charles, and Harry Rosenfield. Immigration Law and Procedure. Al-
bany, N.Y.: Banks Publishers, 1959. An excellent history of immigration
and emigration law. Covers the period from the 1830’s to the 1950’s; sec-
tional discussions of European, African, Chicano, and Asian immigrant ex-
periences.
Peffer, George Anthony. “Forbidden Families: Emigration Experience of Chi-
nese Women Under the Page Law, 1875-1882.” Journal of American Ethnic
History 6 (Fall, 1986): 28-46. Solidly documented research article showing
the relationship between the Page law and engendered immigration of
Chinese people during the first seven years of its existence.
Tung, William L. The Chinese in America, 1820-1973. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana
Publications, 1974. Provides chronological and bibliographical references
on the changing status of Chinese people in American society. Includes
good primary source materials.
See also Asian American women; Chinese American Citizens Alliance;

Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese immigrants; Coolies; Discrimination; Mail-
order brides; Picture brides; War brides; Women immigrants.
583
Palmer raids
Palmer raids
The Event: Federal government roundup and deportation of suspected radi-
cals
Date: 1919-1920
Place: United States
Immigration issues: African Americans; Civil rights and liberties; Govern-

ment and politics; Law enforcement; Nativism and racism
Significance: Fueled by extremist, anti-immigrant sentiments, the Palmer

raids represented the most spectacular anti-civil liberties excesses of the
Red Scare of 1919-1920.
In an attempt to rid the nation of political radicalism, the U.S. attorney gen-
eral, A. Mitchell Palmer, ordered various police units of the federal govern-
ment to raid the homes and headquarters of suspected radicals and aliens.
The raids and the arrests that followed were directed against those, usually
foreign-born, who were accused of radicalism. This offense covered every-
thing from parliamentary socialism to Bolshevism, encompassing “radical
feminism,” anarchism, and labor militancy as well.
In the immediate postwar period, American resistance to anything foreign
stemmed from rumors and formal pronouncements of a great radical foreign
conspiracy aimed at overthrowing the American way of life. Many Americans,
encouraged by political rhetoric and official pronouncements, were con-
vinced that a communist revolution was imminent and that a reaffirmation of
traditional American values, coupled with a good dose of law and order, was
the only thing that would make America safe for Americans.
Political Context of the Raids In several respects, Palmer’s antiradi-

cal crusade continued the espionage and sedition prosecutions of the war
years. The Overman Committee investigating German espionage during
World War I, for example, simply switched to hunting communists and social-
ists after the war. The most spectacular excesses of the “Red Scare” ended by
1921, but the scare remained part of the political climate in the United States
for many years to come. Antiradicalism, for example, played a significant role
in the political agitation for immigrant restriction and antiforeign sentiments
that followed the raids.
In 1919, the U.S. government and organizations purporting to defend
“Americanism” responded to any activity that was perceived to be radical:
strikes were busted (1919 steel and coal strikes, for example); newspapers
called for government action against all radicalism, perceived or real; duly
elected legislators were denied their seats in the New York State Assembly;
and the National Security League, whose main weapon was “organized patrio-
584
Palmer raids
tism,” successfully lobbied Congress to pass laws authorizing the deportation

of aliens and other “irreconcilable radicals.”
The American Legion, advocating the Americanization of United States so-
ciety, declared that radicals were mostly from non-English-speaking groups. In-
dividual state legislatures, among them those of Idaho and Oregon, came
close to passing laws forbidding any publication not written in English. Ac-
cording to historian Frederick Allen,
It was an era of lawless and disorderly defense of law and order, of unconstitu-
tional defense of the U.S. Constitution, of suspicion and civil conflict—in a very
literal sense, a reign of terror . . .
Public reaction to radicalism so affected Palmer that he ordered the Jus-

tice Department’s Bureau of Investigation (the predecessor of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation) to infiltrate and investigate all radical groups. Fol-
lowing the implementation of this program, the bureau’s head, J. Edgar
Hoover, reported back to Palmer that revolution was imminent. Palmer then
organized a federal dragnet aimed at stepping up the raids and arrests. On
January 2, 1920, federal agents arrested more than six thousand people, most
without proper warrant, incarcerating them in jails and detention centers for
weeks and even months without granting rights to legal counsel or bail. Of
those arrested, 516 were eventually deported, including the feminist, anar-
chist, and militant labor organizer Emma Goldman and fellow anarchist and
labor organizer Alexander Berkman.
African American Victims The intolerance expressed in the Palmer

raids took many forms. Some advocated book censorship and others inflicted
agony on “hyphenated Americans,” including African Americans, who were
arguably the chief victims of the Palmer raids and their aftermath. As African
Americans moved to the North, northern whites reacted in fear. Many of
them perceived the influx of these visibly distinct Americans to be a threat to
their social status.
The employment of African Americans threatened white workers with a
status deprivation. In response, many whites struck out at the newcomers, re-
kindling racist fears of the past. For the emigrating African Americans, the
move north signaled a refusal to accept a caste system in the South which had
excluded so many of them from the general prosperity of the nation. Tension
mounted as black aspirations clashed with racial norms. The racial conflict
which followed immediately became linked to the antiradical mood of the
time. White mainstream America feared social upset from any source, whether
it was black Americans or radical immigrants.
The Ku Klux Klan The mood of society in 1919 was as conducive to racial
tension as it was to the Red Scare. Fueled by a witch hunt to weed out Bol-
sheviks and other radicals from America’s inner fabric, racial prejudice be-
585
Palmer raids
came a natural extension of a patri-

otic call for complete Americanism.
From Chicago to Tulsa, racial rela-
tions often became racial violence.
It was in just such an atmosphere
that the Ku Klux Klan experienced
a rebirth.
Fighting for its own version of
“one hundred percent American-
ism,” the Klan played upon the fears
and hostility that existed between
urban and rural America. Klan pro-
paganda, advocating a concern that
public morals were being weak-
ened by the mixing of the races and
by “Red-inspired” trade unionism,
sought to rally traditional Ameri-
cans to its banner. The Klan’s chief
A. Mitchell Palmer before he became U.S . attor- organizer, Edward Y. Clarke, roused
ney general. (Library of Congress) his constituents against a “Jewish-
Banker-Bolshevik conspiracy” that
the Klan saw leading an international movement to take control of America.
This fit right in with Palmer’s warning that a Bolshevik uprising would occur
on May Day, 1920.
Racism was fused to anti-Bolshevism and all that it implied. Because Jews
were perceived by many in rural Protestant America to be of foreign birth, the
Klan’s propaganda was received with patriotic fervor. Most rural Americans
identified radicalism with foreigners. Jews, Roman Catholics, and immigrants
fit into this xenophobic milieu. By 1921, Klan membership passed 100,000
and continued to grow.
The Americanism crusade fit in nicely with concerns of American business
over the growth of trade unionism. Strikes, after all, were a threat to profits,
and American businesspeople were in no mood to have profits reduced. Labor
organizers, in turn, called for a reorganization of the industrial system to pro-
mote workers to a position on par with the power and prestige of industrial
capitalists. In a countervailing move against trade unionism, the business com-
munity called upon patriotism to defeat any “Bolshevik-inspired” labor orga-
nizing activity. Trade unionism was labeled as anti-American, radical, and for-
eign by design. American business viewed the struggle of the worker for better
wages as the beginning of armed revolution in America. Anything or anyone
associated with workers’ rights was therefore anti-American and should be
treated as such. If this meant intolerance of constitutional guarantees, so be it.
Legacy of the Raids A search for a human rights perspective on the

Palmer Raids revolves around three interrelated questions. First, what gave
586
Palmer raids
rise to the Red Scare which precipitated the raids? Second, why were the raids
aimed for the most part at an alien component of the labor movement?
Third, was the entire phenomenon an aberrant episode or an action which
set the tone for the rest of the decade?
The Palmer raids became part of the “normalcy” of the Harding admin-
istration. Antiradicalism continued to play a role throughout the decade in
the agitation for immigrant restriction and as a catalyst for the business
community’s countervailing response of trade unionism. Significant anti-
immigration activity resulted in the passage of the Johnson-Reed Immigra-
tion Act of 1924, which ended three centuries of free European immigration.
This law laid the groundwork for continued anti-alien activity as some native-
born Americans lashed out against those who, by their mere presence, chal-
lenged traditional norms.
Union activity was confronted by the emergence of the antiunion “Ameri-
can Plan,” pursued by business throughout the decade. This effort, launched
by employers to resist labor unionization on every front, included the use of
labor spies to infiltrate the labor movement, the manipulation of public opin-
ion through antiradical and anti-alien propaganda, and the hiring of strike-
breakers to counter organized labor’s ultimate weapon. A major force behind
the plan was the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). Throughout
the decade, NAM expended a very large amount of money and political influ-
ence to lobby against trade unionism. Palmer’s replacement, James Daugh-
erty, complemented this activity in the courts.
During Daugherty’s tenure in office, he was influential in obtaining many
federal injunctions against work stoppages, forcing striking workers back to
work. The courts also made it possible for trade union activities to be classi-
fied as a restraint of trade and therefore to be made illegal. The prevailing
mood of the nation greeted such determinations with enthusiasm. At the be-
ginning of the decade, 20 percent of all nonagricultural workers belonged to
labor unions. By the end of the 1920’s, because of a combination of antiradi-
calism, employer pressure, and unfriendly government activity, this percent-
age was cut in half.
Nativism and the Wobblies Support for official antiradical activity also
fanned the fires of nativism. The Palmer raids continued a wartime obsession
for internal security. A postwar recession, high unemployment, and failures
of international cooperation led to an overall atmosphere of an inability to
confront emerging social pathologies. Antiradical and deportation remedies
of the Departments of Justice and Immigration were part of the nativistic re-
newal of the period.
The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, or Wobblies) played a key part
in the postwar antiradical renewal. Communist influence within the group
encouraged anti-Bolshevist passions to surface against it. Pursuit of the Wob-
blies had been going on since their organization in 1905. Their attempt to
unite all workers into one big union, and their objection to and rejection of
587
Palmer raids
revered American values such as free enterprise and upward social mobility,
painted an anti-American and therefore foreign picture of the organization.
Americans saw the Wobblies as a threat to the internal security of the na-
tion and as a conduit of alien ideas, and the IWW became a feared organiza-
tion. Whether it deserved this reputation was not the point. Federal policies
toward the group took on an antiradical and antialien tone. By the time of
America’s entry into World War I, the immigration, espionage, and sedition
laws had been broadened to allow arrest and deportation of IWW officials.
Many were jailed for conspiracy because of their opposition to the war. The
organization’s leader, William Dudley (Big Bill) Haywood, fled from the
United States to the Soviet Union, where he died and was buried in the
Kremlin wall.
IWW paranoia, and the fervent nativism which it helped to spawn, was reaf-
firmed after the war. Wobblies, particularly in the Pacific Northwest, were
rounded up in antiradical and antialien crusades. The use of troops in the
raids and the denial of legal rights to those arrested and held became at once
an official answer to a nation’s security problem and an appeasement to an in-
secure public’s extreme xenophobia. This “normalcy” continued throughout
the decade.
Further Reading
War on Terrorism. New York: New Press, 2003. Study of the modern problem
of protecting constitutional rights while combatting terrorism whose his-
torical background touches on the Palmer raids.
Gentry, Curt. J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets. New York: W. W. Norton,
1991. Critical biography of the long-time director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation that includes a chapter on the Palmer raids.
Higham, John. Strangers in the Land. 2d ed. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers Uni-
versity Press, 1988. “Intellectual history” that encompasses and synthesizes
political, economic, and social change by providing a summary of agita-
tion for immigrant restriction and against immigration during the early
twentieth century.
Kiel, R. Andrew. J. Edgar Hoover: The Father of the Cold War. Lanham, Md.: Uni-
versity Press of America, 2000. Extensive review of Hoover’s career, includ-
ing the era of the Palmer raids.
Preston, William, Jr. Aliens and Dissenters. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer-
sity Press, 1963. The significance of this study lies in its examination of the
problems of aliens and dissenters. Deals with the period from 1890 to
588
Picture brides
1920, when the fear of foreigners and radicals increased in intensity. Con-
cludes that such fears ultimately made aliens and radicals scapegoats for
the country’s ills.
Tuttle, William M., Jr. Race Riot: Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919. New York:
Atheneum, 1982. History that attempts to explain the race riot and its
causes in terms of individuals and groups. The analysis gets its foundation
from a revealing overview of 1919’s Red Summer and the Red Scare, detail-
ing the racism and antiradicalism of that period.
Wexler, Alice. Emma Goldman in Exile: From the Russian Revolution to the Spanish
Civil War. Boston: Beacon Press, 1989. Details the last twenty years of the
life of American anarchist Emma Goldman, who was deported from the
United States to Russia in 1919, at the height of the anticommunist move-
ment. Presents the image of this radical feminist as “the most dangerous
woman in America.”
See also Alien and Sedition Acts; Immigration Act of 1921; Immigration
Act of 1924; Immigration law; Nativism; Naturalization; Sacco and Vanzetti
trial.
Picture brides
Definition: Women who have arranged marriages with strangers—usually of
the same nationality—in foreign lands that were facilitated by the prior ex-
change of photographs and letters
Immigration issues: Families and marriage; Japanese immigrants; Women
Significance: Picture bride marriages were especially common among Japa-

nese immigrants to the United States and Hawaii before World War II.
Between 1907 and 1924, more than fourteen thousand women immigrated to
Hawaii and the mainland United States from Japan and Korea. Many of these
Asian immigrants were picture brides--women who were selected as wives on
the basis of their photographs. Some of their weddings were conducted by
proxy, with only the women and pictures of the grooms in attendance. When
the women reached their destinations, photographs were used to match
them with their husbands or husbands to be. Often, however, the parties in-
volved did not match the photographs that had been exchanged.
The popularity of marrying picture brides among Japanese immigrants
can be attributed to a combination of social, cultural, economic, and histori-
cal factors. It was first of all a logical extension of the tradition of arranged
marriages. The lesser gender value placed upon daughters also encouraged
589
PLYLER V. DOE
their departure from their homeland into an alternative opportunity. In

modern Japan, the exposure of women to education made them receptive to-
ward the idea of travel, and the industrialization of the population paved the
way for women to become laborers in America. More important, using family
stability as a form of labor control, the plantations of Hawaii had long encour-
aged contracts between laborers and potential spouses.
The experiences of picture brides—especially their conflicts with their
husbands as a result of differences in age, education level, family back-
ground, personal aspirations, and taste—are a constant source of inspiration
for writers and artists, as in Cathy Song’s poetry collection Picture Bride (1983)
and Yoshiko Uchida’s 1987 novel and director-writer Kayo Hatta’s 1995 mo-
tion picture of the same title. Research indicates that picture brides could be-
come accomplished in poetry and the arts, and hence serve as transmitters
and creators of culture. Because picture brides often survived long after their
husbands’ deaths, they have come to be venerated as matriarchs and culture-
bearers by younger generations.
Balance Chow
Further Reading
Ichioka, Yuji. The Issei: The World of the First Generation Japanese Immigrants,
1885-1924. New York: Free Press, 1988.
Makabe, Tomoko. Picture Brides: Japanese Women in Canada. Translated by
Kathleen Chisato Merken. Ontario: Multicultural History Society of On-
tario, 1995.
Uchida, Yoshiko. Picture Bride. 1987. Seattle: University of Washington Press,
1997.
See also Japanese immigrants; Mail-order brides; Page law; War brides;
Women immigrants.
PLYLER V. DOE
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the rights of noncitizens
Date: June 15, 1982
Immigration issues: Court cases; Illegal immigration
Significance: This Supreme Court decision extended the equal protection

clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to guarantee the right of nonciti-
zens to public social services.
590
PLYLER V. DOE
In May, 1975, the Texas legislature enacted a law that denied financial sup-
port for the public education of the children of undocumented aliens. The
state’s local school districts, accordingly, were allowed to exclude such chil-
dren from public school enrollment. The children of noncitizen aliens who
henceforth paid for their public school education still were permitted to en-
roll. Despite the statute, Texas public school districts continued enrolling the
children of undocumented aliens until the 1977-1978 school year, when,
amid a continuing economic recession and accompanying budget tighten-
ing, the law was enforced. An initial challenge to the 1975 law arose in the Ty-
ler Independent School District in Smith County, located in northeastern
Texas, but similar challenges in other school districts soon produced a class-
action suit.
The problem that had inspired the state law was the massive influx—
principally of Mexicans but also of persons from other Central American
countries—into Texas, as well as into New Mexico, Arizona, and California.
Some of these people entered the United States for seasonal agricultural
jobs, while others, undocumented, remained. Most were poor and seeking
economic opportunities unavailable to them in Mexico and Central America.
Figures released by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service esti-
mated that when the Plyler case arose, between two and three million undocu-
mented aliens resided in Texas and other southwestern portions of the
United States. Texas claimed that 5 percent of its population, three-quarters
of a million people, were undocumented aliens, roughly twenty thousand of
whose children were enrolled in Texas public schools. With recession ad-
versely affecting employment, many of the state’s taxpayers asked why they
should bear the financial burdens of educating illegal aliens, as well as provid-
ing them with other benefits, such as food stamps and welfare payments.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision on Plyler v. Doe was delivered by As-
sociate Justice William Joseph Brennan, Jr., a justice whom many observers
considered a liberal but whose overall record was moderate. The Plyler major-
ity ruling upheld a previous decision by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court that had
ruled for the defendants. Chief Justice Warren Burger vigorously dissented
from the majority opinion, along with justices Byron White, William Rehn-
quist, and Sandra Day O’Connor.
On behalf of the Court’s majority, Brennan declared that the 1975 Texas
statute rationally served no substantial state interest and violated the equal
protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Ratified along with the
Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments during the post-Civil War Recon-
struction Era, the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed “that no State shall . . .
deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Al-
though the overriding concern of Reconstruction politicians, judges, and
states ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment was to afford protection to newly
emancipated African Americans, the equal protection clause increasingly
had been interpreted to mean what it stated: guaranteeing equal protection
of the laws to any person—precisely the line of reasoning taken by Brennan.
591
PLYLER V. DOE
Brennan and the Court majority likewise disagreed with the Texas argument
that undocumented aliens did not fall “within its jurisdiction,” thus exclud-
ing them and their children from Fourteenth Amendment guarantees. Such
an exclusion, Brennan declared, condemned innocents to a lifetime of hard-
ship and the stigma of illiteracy.
Impact of PLYLER The Plyler decision was novel in two important respects. It
was the first decision to extend Fourteenth Amendment guarantees to each
person, irrespective of that person’s citizenship or immigration status. Sec-
ond, the Court majority introduced a new criterion for determining the
applicability of Fourteenth Amendment protections: the doctrine of height-
ened or intermediate scrutiny. The Court avoided applying its previous stan-
dard of strict scrutiny. It recognized that education was not a fundamental
right and that undocumented aliens were not, as it had previously phrased it,
a “suspect class,” in the sense that they, like African Americans, historically
had been victims of racial discrimination. Heightened scrutiny was war-
ranted, Brennan and the majority agreed, because of education’s special im-
portance to other social benefits and because children of undocumented
aliens were not responsible for their status.
Chief Justice Burger and the three other dissenting, generally conser-
vative, justices, who were staunch advocates of judicial restraint, strongly
criticized Brennan and the majority for what the dissenters considered to be
arguing political opinions instead of adhering to sound jurisprudence. The
dissenters seriously questioned heightened scrutiny as a judicial standard
and found that the Texas statute substantially furthered the state’s legitimate
interests.
The Plyler decision represented a significant departure from the decision
rendered by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney in Scott v. Sandford (1857), a deci-
sion that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed in part to nullify by po-
litical means. Plyler’s heightened standard of scrutiny, however, continued
through the mid-1990’s to be controversial and confusing, both within the
Supreme Court and among legal observers. The issue arising when the equal
protection clause was applied to cases not involving racial discrimination had
been raised in Buck v. Bell (1927), when Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes de-
nounced such decision making as “the usual last resort of constitutional argu-
ments.”
In Plyler, Brennan and the majority saw no chance to apply the Court’s al-
ready accepted classification of strict scrutiny to equal protection cases, be-
cause Plyler’s defendants, the undocumented aliens, were not victims of insti-
tutionalized racial discrimination or of reverse discrimination. They were
illegals as a consequence of their own conscious actions. Nevertheless, as le-
gal scholars observed, in order to prevent hardship and stigmas from afflict-
ing schoolchildren, who were not responsible for their parents’ actions, the
Plyler majority introduced an intermediate level of classification with their
standard of heightened scrutiny. Such a standard raised questions about
592
PLYLER V. DOE
whether undocumented aliens and their families enjoyed rights to other gov-
ernment benefits, such as welfare assistance, medical care, and food stamps.
The difficulties confronted by Texas, by other Southwestern states, and by
illegal aliens and their children were alleviated somewhat by a broad federal
amnesty program launched in 1992.
Clifton K. Yearley
Further Reading
Aleinikoff, Thomas A., and David A. Martin. Immigration: Process and Policy.
2d ed. Saint Paul, Minn.: West, 1991. A careful review of modern U.S.
immigration policies. Discusses the problems posed by illegal, undocu-
mented aliens and the difficulties faced by government policy makers in
coping with illegals.
Blasi, Vincent, ed. The Burger Court. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press,
1983. An authoritative yet readable analysis of the Chief Justiceship of War-
ren Burger, which did little to modify civil rights decisions of his predeces-
sors. Also clarifies Brennan’s attitudes and decisions.
Curtis, Michael Kent. No State Shall Abridge. Durham, N.C.: Duke University
Press, 1986. A clear, scholarly exposition of the role played by the Four-
teenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights in modern U.S. jurisprudence,
including civil and criminal rights, racial and reverse discriminations, and
interpretations of due process.
Hull, Elizabeth. Without Justice for All. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press,
1985. A precise study bearing on the problems raised in Plyler, the histori-
cal plight of resident and illegal aliens and their families, and the varying
status of their constitutional rights.
Mirande, Alfredo. Gringo Justice. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame
Press, 1990. A spirited, dismaying critique of U.S. judicial and political
treatment of Hispanic immigrants by both the states and the federal gov-
ernment. Provides excellent context for understanding important aspects
of the Plyler case.
Nelson, William. The Fourteenth Amendment. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1988. An authoritative analysis of the evolution of the Four-
teenth Amendment from a set of political principles to a vital part of twen-
tieth century judicial decision making. Good analyses of the Supreme
Court’s standards of scrutiny, including the intermediate or “heightened”
scrutiny applied in Plyler.
See also Asian American education; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Lau v.

Nichols; Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Naturaliza-
tion; Proposition 187; Proposition 227.
593
Polish immigrants
Polish immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the eastern European
nation of Poland and its neighbors
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants; Refugees
Significance: Because of their large numbers and tendency to settle in cul-

turally diverse areas, Polish Americans have figured prominently in inter-
ethnic relations. As they have moved through the assimilation process, Pol-
ish Americans have been both victimized by prejudice and accused of
discriminating against other ethnic and racial groups.
Polish Americans are generally defined as those whose heritage was con-
nected to the Polish language, culture, and Roman Catholicism. Polish Amer-
icans who arrived between 1608 and 1800 came for personal reasons, and
those emigrating from 1800 to 1860 came to escape foreign control over their
homeland. The third and largest wave, of 2.5 million immigrants between
1870 and 1924, sought to escape the economic hardships of their homeland.
After World War II, a fourth wave of Poles came to the United States as dis-
placed persons or political refugees fleeing the communist government.
Intergroup Relations The relatively small number of Poles arriving dur-

ing the first two immigration periods meant that intergroup relations were
rather limited. The settlers who arrived from 1608 to 1800 did not establish
communities, and relations with others in the United States were almost ex-
clusively on an individual basis. However, Polish Americans who served dur-
ing the American Revolution were regarded positively, and the political refu-
gees, who made up the bulk of the next wave, gained the respect of Americans
for their dedication to independence, nationalism, and liberalism. The large
group of Poles arriving during the 1870-1924 wave interacted as a group with
established American society, with earlier immigrants, and with other eastern
and southern European immigrants.
Because most Polish immigrants came to the United States to work as un-
skilled laborers in urban-industrial areas, established Americans viewed them
as essential but not necessarily welcome additions. The vast differences in lan-
guage and customs and the formation of distinct ethnic communities caused
many people to question whether Poles could ever adapt to American society.
Established Americans also mistrusted Poles because of their support of labor
unions and their use of alcoholic beverages, which were contrary to Protestant
ideals of individualism and sobriety.
Relations between Polish Americans and earlier immigrants were often
strained. Poles resented the English, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish immigrants
who constituted the skilled laborers and bosses in the mines, mills, and facto-
594
Polish immigrants
ries. The Poles reacted against Irish American control of the Roman Catholic
hierarchy by forming their own ethnic national parishes. This desire for a sep-
arate Polish Catholic identity became so strong that a schism with Roman Ca-
tholicism occurred when the Reverend Francis Hodur founded the Polish
National Church in 1904.
Although this group of Poles faced circumstances similar to those faced by
other immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, relations between
these groups were not always the best. Poles held stereotypical views of and
harbored resentments against other Slavs, and many had come to the United
States with a tradition of anti-Semitism. When Poles and Lithuanians shared
churches, the result was less than harmonious, and splits were usually the re-
sult. Although direct confrontations with Italians were not common, each
group often accepted the prevalent stereotypes about the other.
However, Polish American businesspeople often had solid working rela-
tionships with people of various ethnic backgrounds. Many young Polish im-
migrant women served as domestics in the homes of Euro-Americans or Jew-
ish Americans and built a warm relationship with their employers. Despite
the remnants of Old World anti-Semitism, Polish laborers and Jewish shop-
keepers developed respectful and trusting business dealings. Poles cooper-
ated with other immigrants from eastern and southern Europe to form labor
unions. Their success in this venue played an important role in the establish-
ment of unions as a powerful force in the United States.
Polish immigrant husking corn on a Connecticut farm in 1941. (Library of Congress)
595
Polish immigrants
Polish Immigration to the United States,

1821-1898, 1920-2003
25,000 1939-1945
24,000 German
23,000 occupation
22,000 of Poland
21,000
20,000
19,000
18,000
1919
17,000 Restoration
16,000 of Polish
15,000 independence
14,000
13,000 1946-1989
12,000 Poland part
11,000 of Soviet
10,000 bloc during
9,000 ? Cold War
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000 1815-1918
4,000 Poland under
3,000 foreign rule
2,000
1,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1898
1899-1919
1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. Data on specifically Polish immigration are not available for 1899-1919, when
Poland was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Assimilation and Intergroup Relations By the 1920’s, the passage of

time and restrictive immigration laws hastened the assimilation process. Al-
though Polish Americans were becoming more Americanized, new social
structures were being established, altering intergroup relations. During the
latter part of the twentieth century, Polish American intergroup relations in-
volved the relations of the more elderly urban blue-collar workers, the white-
collar professionals, and the new associations of refugees from Poland.
Many urban blue-collar workers came of age during the Great Depression
and World War II. They endured a life of sacrifice and want but were able to
gain social and economic mobility in the postwar boom years. However, by
the 1970’s, economic decline had hit the major employers of many Polish
Americans, and an increasing number of African Americans and Hispanics
596
Polish immigrants
had moved into traditionally Polish neighborhoods. Although most Polish

Americans had adequate financial resources to sustain them into retirement,
the combination of their weakened economic situation and the loss of their
ethnic communities often resulted in resentment toward the newer residents.
Although violent conflict was rare, tensions were high between urban Polish
Americans and their new neighbors, the African Americans and Hispanics.
Polish white-collar professionals, who often married non-Poles, tended to
identify less with the ethnic group and more with the concerns of their socio-
economic class. At times, this caused them to become estranged from the
older Polish Americans. The refugees from communism, relatively small in
number, tended to affiliate with their socioeconomic and employment peers.
Despite the differences in class and status, Polish Americans still face a cer-
tain degree of discrimination. Stereotypes that depict Polish Americans as
lacking intelligence have been especially hurtful. Polish American accep-
tance of such humor has, perhaps, contributed to this prejudice. Although
Polish Americans increasingly identify with middle-class values, some of these
traditional patterns of intergroup dynamics persist.
Paul J. Zbiek
Further Reading
Balch, Emily Greene. Our Slavic Fellow Citizens. New York: Charities Publica-
tion Committee, 1910. Reprint. New York: Arno Press, 1969. Classic early
study of Slavic immigrants including Poles.
Bukowiczyk, John J. Polish Americans and Their History: Community, Culture, and
Politics. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1996. Good general his-
tory of Polish immigrants in the United States.
Greene is also the author of The Slavic Community on Strike: Immigrant Labor
in Pennsylvania Anthracite (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame
Press, 1968.)
Lopata, Helena Z. Polish Americans: Status Competition in an Ethnic Community.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976. Overview of the Polish Ameri-
can ethnic experience in one community.
Thomas, William I., and Florian Znaniecki. The Polish Peasant in Europe and
America. Boston: Richard G. Badger, 1918. Reprint. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1996. Another classic study of Polish immigrants that exam-
ines the condition of Poles in both the Old World and the New World.
See also Anglo-conformity; Eastern European Jewish immigrants; Euro-

Americans; European immigrants, 1892-1943; German immigrants; Jewish
immigrants; Russian immigrants.
597
Proposition 187
Proposition 187
The Law: California voter initiative to limit public services available to un-
documented immigrants
Date: Voted on November 8, 1994
Place: California
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Latino immigrants; Laws and
treaties; Mexican immigrants
Significance: In this voter initiative, California residents expressed their re-

sentment of the demands on state services made by the state’s large undoc-
umented worker population.
On November 8, 1994, approximately 60 percent of the voters of California

marked their ballots in favor of Proposition 187, the so-called Save Our State
or “SOS” initiative. Drafted by a conservative Orange County businessman,
the proposition was designed to end state-funded education and welfare ben-
efits for illegal aliens. It also limited publicly funded medical assistance avail-
able to illegal aliens, who could be treated only in life-threatening emergen-
cies requiring immediate attention. Under provisions of the proposition,
teachers and physicians were required to report illegal aliens to the immigra-
tion authorities.
Hard pressed by an economic downturn and by a series of natural disasters
including earthquakes, fires, and floods, the state of California was home to
an estimated 1.6 million illegal aliens. Many of them held minimum-wage
jobs that most Americans were reluctant to fill. The estimated annual cost to
California for services related to illegal immigrants exceeded $3 billion. How
much of this was offset by various taxes paid by these workers was a subject of
debate.
Both supporters and opponents of Proposition 187 agreed that this legisla-
tion was unconstitutional, violating both the equal protection guarantees of
the U.S. Constitution and hundreds of antidiscrimination laws. The primary
motivation of those who supported the initiative was to get the matter of pro-
viding public services to illegal aliens into the courts. Their ultimate aim was
to overturn some legislation and to negate some of the related decisions
handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Underlying the appearance of Proposition 187 on the ballot in 1994 was
the campaign of Governor Pete Wilson, who rode a wave of conservatism into
the state house in 1991. Wilson, a two-term U.S. senator with presidential am-
bitions for 1996, proposed legislation targeting illegal aliens. His programs
were popular among voters who faced diminished employment opportuni-
ties, increased taxes, and decreased public services. Illegal aliens were identi-
fied as a cause of these problems.
598
Proposition 187
Wilson campaigned for the passage of Proposition 187 realizing that the
national publicity such a campaign would generate could benefit him sub-
stantially among conservative voters, whose ranks were growing nationally.
Despite its obvious defects, the proposition that six of every ten California
voters approved enjoyed considerable popularity nationwide.
Economic Effects Agriculture and mining had been mainstays of Califor-

nia’s economy since the sprawling territory achieved statehood in 1850, be-
coming the thirty-first of the United States. Immigrants, legal and otherwise,
helped to build the state and became a fundamental part of its economy. Cali-
fornia had long been one of several significantly multiethnic states. Many
people count this among California’s greatest assets.
California’s major industries, including defense and aerospace, began to
feel severe economic pressures with the cessation of the Cold War during the
late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Voters faced with uncertain economic futures re-
sented having to pay taxes to help support those whose presence in their state
and country was illegal. These undocumented immigrants contributed sub-
stantially to the state’s economy, however, by taking jobs that their legally doc-
umented counterparts were often unwilling to take and by paying taxes for
unemployment insurance and supplemental security income, benefits to
which they did not have access.
Passage of Proposition 187 did not result in the disappearance of illegal
immigrants from California. The conditions under which they remained
there, however, were increasingly difficult. The full enactment of this initia-
tive was blocked by the courts as test cases worked their way through the judi-
cial system. Less than a week after the election, various groups had begun to
test the law, and on November 14, 1994, a federal judge temporarily blocked
enactment of the measure.
It has been argued that Proposition 187 not only violated the U.S. Consti-
tution and various laws but also created unacceptable conflicts between state
law and professional ethics and responsibilities. For example, physicians are
professionally obligated to treat any patient who requires treatment. A law
mandating that they report patients who seek their professional services to
the government violates the standards by which the medical profession tradi-
tionally has been guided.
Consequences The repercussions following the passage of Proposition

187 were enormous. The vote had implications far beyond the matter of what
services should be available to illegal aliens and their dependents. It reflected
a major shift in the thinking of many Americans about the kind of nation the
United States is becoming and suggested an undercurrent of racism. The
proposition expanded debates on immigration at the national level.
From the late 1960’s to the early 1990’s, Americans who had been unfairly
disenfranchised became beneficiaries of legislation that accorded them the
rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Those who had been discriminated
599
Proposition 227
against because of race, gender, religion, sexual preference, or physical dis-

ability were now protected. Such programs as affirmative action required
preferential treatment for those falling into the above categories in terms of
employment, education, and other opportunities in organizations that re-
ceive government funding. These programs were intended to reverse the ef-
fects of past discrimination.
In late July, 1995, the Board of Regents of the University of California
voted to abolish affirmative action. They decided to end racial preferences in
hiring and contracting by January, 1996, and end preferences in admissions
to the nine campuses of the university system by January, 1997. Jack W.
Peltason, president of the system, agreed to comply with the mandate, adding
that the system sought to reflect California’s ethnic diversity in the popula-
tions of its nine campuses. Chancellor Chang-lin Tien of the University of Cal-
ifornia, Berkeley, had never strongly supported affirmative action. He ac-
cepted the regents’ recommendation that the universities in the system do
everything they could to achieve diversity but without using preferences for
admission based on race, gender, or ethnicity.
R. Baird Shuman
Further Reading
2003.
See also Plyler v. Doe; Proposition 227; Undocumented workers.
Proposition 227
The Law: California voter initiative to abolish bilingual education in public
schools
Date: Voted on June 2, 1998
Place: California
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Education; Language; Latino

immigrants; Laws and treaties; Mexican immigrants
Significance: After thirty years of experimentation with bilingual education

in California’s public schools, voters decided it did not work and voted
overwhelmingly to end it in a ballot initiative.
600
Proposition 227
Image Not Available
Beginning the early education of schoolchildren in their own languages be-

came a goal of California’s bilingual education policy during the 1970’s,
when educators hoped that by giving children a strong educational start in
their own languages, they would be better prepared to succeed after shifting
over to English-language education. However, as time passed, that goal
seemed impossible to achieve. California’s schoolchildren speak an esti-
mated 140 different languages in their homes. To teach each group of them
in their own languages before teaching them in English was beyond the re-
sources of California’s massive education system.
In June, 1998, the issue of bilingualism was placed before the voters of Cali-
fornia in a referendum. Their response was strong: “No Mas”—no more bilin-
gual education in their public schools.
The liberal California of the 1960’s appeared to have reprogrammed itself
in latter years with regard to social issues. In 1994, for example, Californians
voted against providing government benefits to undocumented immigrants.
Next, they voted against affirmative action. Finally, in November, 1997, voter
groups filed petitions for a movement called English for the Children—a bal-
lot measure sponsored by Silicon Valley millionaire Ron Unz, whose mother
was an immigrant from Russia. In 1994, the Republican Unz had unsuccess-
fully challenged Republican incumbent Pete Wilson in the primary election
for governor.
California’s bilingual education controversy was also developing around
the same time that the board of the Oakland Unified School District made its
601
Proposition 227
widely ridiculed pronouncement that Ebonics—black English—should be re-

garded as a language separate from English. Ironically, just as African Ameri-
cans were split on the Ebonics debate, California’s Hispanic population was
also splintered on the need for bilingual education.
The Unz Initiative In 1987, just over 500,000 California children at-
tended some type of bilingual classes. By 1997, the number had risen to
nearly 1.4 million. According to a 1997 U.S. News & World Report story, Califor-
nia, with its burgeoning immigrant population, led the nation in proportion
of its students who were not proficient in English, with a figure of 25 percent,
compared with 6.7 percent of students nationally. By definition, these are stu-
dents who cannot understand English well enough to keep up in school.
Eighty-eight percent of California’s public schools had at least one limited
English proficient (LEP) student, and 71 percent had at least twenty LEP stu-
dents. (In 1997 the acronym LEP was changed to EL, for English learners.)
Traditionally immigrants to the United States, speaking an assortment of
languages, regard English as the language of upward mobility and want their
children to learn it as quickly as possible. This attitude was still held by many
immigrant families in California during the late 1990’s, and some of them
were among the opponents to bilingual education. The largest non-English
speaking groups in California were Latinos, especially Mexican Americans,
84 percent of whom indicated in late 1997 that they would support the Unz
bilingual education initiative, according to a Los Angeles Times poll. That fig-
ure compared impressively with the 80 percent of white voters who indicated
that they would back the initiative.
The Unz measure was cochaired by Gloria Matta Tuchman, a Mexican
American teacher who had used English immersion to teach students for
about fifteen years. The measure also benefited from a strong endorsement
from Jaime Escalante, the Bolivian immigrant who taught calculus to urban
Latino youths and became California’s most famous schoolteacher—thanks,
in part, to the 1988 film Stand and Deliver.
The Unz initiative called for a one-year English immersion program,
which many educators said wouldn’t prepare students for academic work in
English, although it would allow them to speak more easily to their friends on
the playground. Initially many state Republicans avoided the bilingual educa-
tion debate, fearing that the Democrats would label supporters “racists.”
They also recalled that while many Latinos had earlier begun by supporting
Proposition 187, the ballot initiative to deny benefits to undocumented
aliens, they later turned against it and also voted against the measure’s Re-
publican supporters during the 1996 elections.
Critics of the Unz measure argued that it ignored important research data
that demonstrated successes in bilingual education programs. Supporters of
the measure countered that bilingual education created an educational
ghetto by isolating non-English speaking students and preventing them from
becoming successful members of society. They also accused politicians and
602
Proposition 227
educators of profiting from bilingual education. For example, they noted

that some bilingual teachers were paid up to five thousand dollars a year ex-
tra, while school districts were receiving hundreds of millions of extra dollars
simply for placing students in bilingual classes.
Opposition to the referendum was led primarily by major African Ameri-
can organizations, Democrats, the ethnic news media, several Asian Ameri-
can groups, bilingual education teachers, Latino activists, and organizations
such as the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the
California PTA, the California School Boards Association, the California
Teachers Association, and the California Federation of Teachers. Several of
these organizations publicly denounced the Unz measure and viewed it to be
the third in a chain of anti-immigrant proposals that emerged during the
mid-1990’s.
In March, 1998, three months before the state measure actually passed, the
California state board of education voted unanimously to discard its thirty-
year-old bilingual education policy. Although California’s basic bilingual
education law had expired in 1987, state law still required native-language
instruction when necessary to provide immigrant children with an equal
chance for academic success.
Consequences In June, 1998, Californians voted, by a margin of 61 percent

to 39 percent, for Proposition 227, which placed major restrictions on bilin-
gual education, limiting parent choice on the education programs for their
children. Proposition 227 mandated a one-size-fits-all approach to instruc-
tion of English learners. Afterward, Californians Together, a round table
of education and civil rights groups and organizations, analyzed selected
schools still providing bilingual instruction to substantial numbers of stu-
dents and determined that their students could equal or exceed the perfor-
mances of students in English-immersion classes.
Additional discussions and findings on California’s and the nation’s bilin-
gual education future will likely come from education organizations and
think tanks such as the National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education lo-
cated at George Washington University, and the National Association for Bi-
lingual Education, also headquartered in the nation’s capital.
Keith Orlando Hilton
Further Reading
Anderson, Jim, et al., eds. Portraits of Literacy Across Families, Communities, and
Schools: Intersections and Tensions. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates,
2005.
Hones, Donald F., and Cher Shou Cha. Educating New Americans: Immigrants
Lives and Learning. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates, 1999.
603
Push and pull factors
Kenner, Charmian. Becoming Biliterate: Young Children Learning Different Writ-
ing Systems. Sterling, Va.: Trentham Books, 2004.
2003.
Osborn, Terry A., ed. Language and Cultural Diversity in U.S. Schools: Democratic
Principles in Action. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2005.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics, 2005.
See also Anglo-conformity; Asian American Legal Defense Fund; Bilin-

gual Education Act of 1968; Cultural pluralism; English-only and official En-
glish movements; Generational acculturation; Lau v. Nichols; Proposition 187.

Definition: Conditions and forces that encourage people to migrate
Immigration issues: Demographics; Labor; Sociological theories
Significance: Because migration is costly and stressful, people generally mi-

grate only when there are strong incentives to do so. For example, condi-
tions where they live may become unusually bad, giving people a “push” to
leave. On the other hand, conditions may appear unusually good some-
where else, and they feel a “pull” toward that location. Often a combina-
tion of “push” and “pull” factors motivates migration, but the “push” factor
usually is necessary for migration to be seriously considered.
Traditionally, religious and political persecution have been powerful push

factors. The New England Puritans and the Pennsylvania Quakers fled reli-
gious persecution by coming to North America. Persecution of Jews in czarist
Russia in the nineteenth century also motivated thousands to flee farther
west. Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin escalated such persecutions during the
1930’s and 1940’s, culminating in the torture and deaths of millions of Jews
during the Holocaust and Soviet pogroms. During the 1990’s, refugees fled
from tyrannical regimes in Africa, the Balkans, and the Middle East. U.S. im-
migration policy has given favored status to people who can show they have
been victims of such persecution.
The push may also arise from unfavorable economic circumstances. Potato
famines during the 1840’s led to a mass exodus from Ireland and the Scandi-
604
Many immigrants to North America endured great hardships in their transoceanic journeys. (Li-
brary of Congress)
navian countries, bringing many migrants to North America. Within the

United States, the mechanization of cotton cultivation during the 1940’s and
1950’s greatly reduced the need for field hands in the South, causing thou-
sands of African American families to move to the industrial North. The latter
was a gradual process whereby the improvement in agricultural productivity
reduced the number of people needed to produce food and fiber, leading to
migrations from farms to towns and cities.
The strongest pull factors have been economic. People often move to loca-
tions where they expect to find good jobs and comfortable incomes. North
America has exerted this kind of pull on the rest of the world since the mid-
nineteenth century. Initially the great attraction was the vast abundance of
fertile and relatively cheap land. By 1900, however, American manufacturing
industries were also eager to employ relatively cheap and docile immigrant la-
605
Racial and ethnic demographic trends
bor. Railroads, land speculators, and factory owners all sent recruiters to Eu-
rope to encourage immigrants.
The United States has continued to exert this kind of pull, partly because
its labor market is relatively free from apprenticeship regulations and mo-
nopolistic labor union restrictions on who can be hired. The clearest evi-
dence is the flood of migrants coming northward from Mexico, who in addi-
tion have been “pushed” by poor economic conditions and a lack of jobs in
their mother country. A strong pull during the 1990’s arose as American
firms actively recruited people with computer skills, mostly from Asia. Immi-
gration preferences are given to people with scarce job skills.
Finally, an important pull results from the desire to be reunited with family
members. During the early 1990’s, about half of all legal immigration into the
United States involved spouses, children, or parents of U.S. citizens.
Paul B. Trescott
Further Reading
Akhtar, Salman. Immigration and Identity: Turmoil, Treatment, and Transforma-
tion. Northvale, N.J.: Jason Aronson, 1999.
2000.
See also History of U.S. immigration; Israeli immigrants; Justice and im-
migration; Twice migrants.
Racial and ethnic

demographic trends
Definition: Changing composition of populations
Immigration issues: African Americans; Chinese immigrants; Demographics
Significance: The demographic makeup of North America has changed

greatly over the years, affecting the relations between and relative power
and dominance of the various racial and ethnic groups that live in these
nations of immigrants.
606
Contemporary drawing of a government census taker in 1870. (Library of Congress)
The United States, Canada, and Australia are the three most important “re-
ceiving” countries for immigrants worldwide. The United States and Canada,
as a result of their immigration policies, have become two of the world’s most
ethnically diverse geographical areas. Two centuries ago, the population of
these two nations was predominantly of white European heritage, but in the
twenty-first century, nonwhites and people whose heritage is not European
are expected to become an increasingly large part of their populations. Be-
cause the United States and Canada both possess a strong democratic ethos
and high standard of living, they are likely to attract many more people, espe-
cially oppressed ethnic minorities.
United States Since 1790, as required by the U.S. Constitution, a census

has been conducted every ten years. The initial purpose of the census was to
enable the U.S. government to determine an equitable apportionment of tax
dollars and the number of representatives each area would send to Congress.
During its early history, the census was executed by temporary workers in
nonpermanent facilities. It was not until March, 1902, that the government
created the Bureau of the Census with a full-time staff and permanent facili-
ties.
A perennial issue for the bureau has been the underreporting of certain
subpopulations, including the very young, the poor, immigrants, and non-
whites. The resulting lower numbers have often resulted in those populations
having less government representation and fewer benefits. In the latter part
of the twentieth century, the bureau made great efforts to correct these short-
comings by making questionnaires available in Spanish and developing meth-
ods for assessing the undocumented immigrant population.
607
Regional Backgrounds of
U.S. Immigrants, 1820-1985
(percent)
1820- 1861- 1900- 1921- 1961- 1971- 1981-

1860 1899 1920 1960 1970 1980 1985
Northern and western Europe 95 68 41 38 18 7 5
North America 3 7 6 19 12 4 2
Southern and eastern Europe — 22 44 20 15 11 6
Asia — 2 4 4 13 35 48
Latin America — — 4 18 39 40 35
Other 2 1 1 1 3 3 4
Source: L. F. Bouvier and R. W. Gardner, Immigration to the U.S . Washington, D.C .: Population Reference
Bureau, 1986.
During its first hundred years, the United States had an open immigration
policy. It was not until 1882 that Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act,
which outlawed Chinese immigration for ten years. This anti-Chinese legisla-
tion followed thirty years of heavy Chinese immigration during which more
than two hundred thousand Chinese came to the United States to escape
overpopulation, poverty, and warfare in China.
The history of legal immigration to the United States between 1820 and
1985 exhibits dramatic changes in the regions of the world from which immi-
grants came. Most striking is the decline of European immigrants, largely
whites, and the significant increase in immigrants from Latin America and
Asia, mostly Hispanics and nonwhites. Experts have projected population
changes that suggest that by 2080, the U.S. population will consist of 49.8
percent white non-Hispanics, 23.4 percent Hispanics, 14.7 percent African
Americans, and 12 percent Asians and other persons.
Canada Canada, founded by the British and French, had exclusionary

laws that discouraged nonwhite, ethnic immigrants, but these laws were re-
laxed after World War II. The nation’s present multicultural population re-
flects the new immigration policies: Of the almost 29 million people in Can-
ada, as estimated in the 1996 census, about 40 percent are of British ancestry,
27 percent are of French, 20 percent are of other European, and 1.5 percent
are of Indian and Inuit ancestry. The remaining population, 11.5 percent,
consists of people of African, Asian, and Hispanic origins. Although the num-
ber of people with non-European ancestry in Canada’s population is ex-
pected to increase in the next century, it is anticipated that people of Euro-
pean descent will continue to dominate its culture and seats of political
power.
608
Ancient Peoples of North America Recent archaeological research

suggests that human beings, probably Homo erectus, were living in North
America as far back as 135,000 years ago. At the time of the first European
contact, about 12 million to 15 million Indians and 20,000 Inuit (Eskimos)
were living in North America. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, about 2 mil-
lion American Indians and around 81,000 Inuit lived in the United States. In
Canada, in 1996, census takers reported fewer than 500,000 aboriginals, that
is, people of either Indian or Inuit background. Mistreatment by whites and
deadly epidemics account for the great reduction in the Indian population.
Better living conditions (partly due to distance from early settlers) explain
the increase in the Inuit population.
African Americans The United States, with about 30 million African

Americans, has the third-largest black population in the world (Brazil and Ni-
geria have larger populations); however, Canada has fewer than 1 million
black people, mostly of West Indian descent. Contrary to popular belief, the
first black people in North America were not slaves. In 1619, twenty black
men became indentured servants to wealthy Virginian white men. However,
most other Africans who landed in the United States came as slaves. From the
beginning of the American slave trade in the seventeenth century to the
Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, almost 90 percent of all African Ameri-
cans in what is now the United States were slaves. The first U.S. Census in
1790 reported 757,000 African Americans. By 1800, they numbered 1 million.
In the 1860 census, there were about 4,442,000 African Americans. The 1990
U.S. Census reported almost 30 million African Americans, or about 12.1 per-
Regional Backgrounds of U.S. Immigrants

During the Twenty-first Century
Region 2001 2002 2003
Europe 177,833 177,652 102,843
Asia (including Middle East) 337,566 326,871 236,039
Canada 30,203 27,299 16,555
Mexico 204,844 217,318 114,984
Caribbean 96,958 94,240 67,660
Central America 73,063 66,520 53,435
South America 68,279 73,400 54,155
Africa 50,209 56,135 45,640
Oceania 7,253 6,536 5,102
Not specified 18,110 17,664 9,414
Totals 1,064,318 1,063,635 705,827
609
cent of the total U.S. population of

Foreign-Born Population
in the United States in almost 250 million. By 2080, it is
projected that African Americans
2004 by Region of Birth
will reach around 14.7 percent of
the U.S. population. Although Af-
Other rican Americans made tremendous
8% Europe progress in the second half of the
14%
twentieth century, many serious
problems still need to be addressed
and solved.
Latin Asia
America 25% Hispanics Hispanics were among
(mostly
Mexico) the earliest nonnative peoples to
53% populate North America. In 1513,
Juan Ponce de León discovered
Florida, and in 1565, Spaniards set-
tled St. Augustine in present-day
Florida. They also colonized Mex-
Source: U.S . Census Bureau, Current Population ico and parts of the American
Survey, 2004. Southwest. As a result, Hispanics
have largely been concentrated in
the Southwestern states: Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, and Califor-
nia. In the past one hundred years, large Hispanic populations have also de-
veloped in New York, New Jersey, Florida, and Illinois. In 1996, Hispanics
numbered 28 million, or around 11 percent of the U.S. population. By 2080,
this group is projected to constitute about 23.4 percent of the U.S. popula-
tion and to be the largest ethnic group in the country.
Asians and Arab Americans The first Asians to arrive in the United States
were the Chinese. In 1849, there were only 54 Chinese in the whole nation.
The 1990 U.S. Census estimated the Chinese American population at 1,645,000.
The census counted 815,450 Japanese Americans, some 800,000 Korean
Americans, about 815,000 East Indians, and 870,000 Arab Americans. More
than two-thirds of the Arab Americans live in ten states and about one-third
live in three metropolitan areas: Detroit, Michigan; New York City, and the
Los Angeles area. Metropolitan Detroit has the largest Arab American com-
munity in the United States.
During the 1880’s, Chinese and Japanese immigrants came to Canada to
help construct the railroad and work on other industrial projects. They were
soon followed by East Indians. From around 1900 until World War II, exclu-
sionary laws kept most Asians from immigrating to Canada. However, after
the war, Canada relaxed its immigration policies, and many Asians and other
ethnic groups came to Canada.
The Future For the last five hundred years, the United States and Canada
have been dominated by white European peoples and cultures. However, in
610
the last fifty years, non-Europeans, nonwhites, Hispanics, and Asians have be-
come the fastest-growing populations in these nations. Experts have pre-
dicted that by 2080 more than 50 percent of the U.S. population will be non-
European and nonwhite and that the largest ethnic group will be Hispanic. In
Canada, although the makeup of the population is changing, it is not likely
that the U.S. population patterns will be duplicated. However, the proportion
of British, French, and European people in the overall population is pro-
jected to fall. In the face of these trends, the power and influence of the domi-
nant white group in the United States and Canada will probably diminish
somewhat, and the two nations will continue to be pluralistic and democratic
societies that attract refugees and immigrants.
R. M. Frumkin
Further Reading
Hughes, James W., and Joseph J. Seneca, eds. America’s Demographic Tapestry:
Baseline for the New Millennium. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University
Press, 1999. Collection of articles on a variety of demographic topics.
versity Press, 2002. Articles on the Census Bureau’s constantly evolving em-
ployment of racial and ethnic categories.
Nobles, Melissa. Shades of Citizenship: Race and the Census in Modern Politics.
Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2000. Study of the use made of
census data in politics.
Collection of critical essays on the U.S. Census’s changing racial categories
and the social and political effects of these changes.
ity. New York: New York University Press, 2000. Examination of the use of
racial and ethnic categories in the census with particular attention to His-
panics, who have been frequently reclassified.
611
Refugee fatigue

cludes chapters on Mexicans, Cubans, Central Americans, Filipinos, Viet-
namese, Haitians, and other West Indians.
itics. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000. Analytical study
of the problems of accurately counting members of racial and ethnic
groups in the U.S. Census.
Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2004-2005. 124th ed. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Census Bureau, 2005. Starting place for any research on demograph-
ics. Updated annually, this reference source is available on compact disc,
and much of its information is freely available online on the U.S. Census
Bureau’s Web site.
See also Censuses, U.S.; Demographics of immigration; Illegal aliens; Im-

migration “crisis.”
Refugee fatigue
Definition: Reluctance of host countries to extend or expand assistance, asy-
lum, or resettlement to refugees
Immigration issues: Refugees; Sociological theories
Significance: Also known as “compassion” fatigue, refugee fatigue develops

when the citizens of nations receiving large numbers of refugees begin
feeling overburdened by the needs of the newcomers and fear being over-
run by outsiders.
Refugees are typically victims of political persecution who are fleeing from
their homelands in attempts to find asylum in other nations. Refugee, or
compassion, fatigue is most likely to occur when the refugee population be-
gins to become a significant burden on the host community’s economic and
social infrastructure, or at least when the perception develops that such bur-
dens are growing. Refugees sometimes flee into areas where they can find
support among ethnic kinspeople, as often happens in Africa. In Asia, how-
ever, the flight of Sino-Vietnamese refugees into the Philippines, Indonesia,
Thailand, and Malaysia during the 1970’s and 1980’s excited substantial xe-
nophobic responses that greatly accelerated perceptions of compassion fa-
tigue in the region.
Such concerns may be allayed somewhat if other countries agree to pro-
vide opportunities to resettle in a third country and to finance the costs of
temporary haven in the country of first asylum. However, donor country pop-
612
Refugee fatigue
President Gerald Ford during his April, 1975, visit to California, where he greeted arriving refugees
from Vietnam. (NARA/Gerald R. Ford Library)
ulations and governments often grow tired of accepting resettled refugees

and financing large overseas programs. When both host nations and coun-
tries of resettlement experience refugee or compassion fatigue simultaneously,
pressures grow to eliminate humanitarian aid programs and to repatriate ref-
ugees or asylum seekers to their original homelands. In some cases, racial or
ethnic biases heighten popular resentment of such humanitarian programs;
more often, economics is the central cause of compassion fatigue.
During the 1980’s, owing to the civil wars in Central America, large num-
bers of asylum seekers joined the stream of illegal immigrants or undocu-
mented immigrants from Mexico seeking work and safe haven in the United
States. For many Americans, this influx led to fears of uncontrolled immigra-
tion and a hardening of attitudes toward those in distress.
Robert F. Gorman
Further Reading
Balgopal, Pallassana R., ed. Social Work Practice with Immigrants and Refugees.
New York: Columbia University Press, 2000.
trols. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley, 2005.
Potocky-Tripodi, Miriam. Best Practices for Social Work with Refugees and Immi-
grants. New York: Columbia University Press, 2002.
613
Refugee Relief Act of 1953
Zolberg, Aristide R., and Peter M. Benda, eds. Global Migrants, Global Refugees:
Problems and Solutions. New York: Berghahn Books, 2001.
See also Cuban refugee policy; Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Helsinki

Watch report on U.S. refugee policy; Justice and immigration; Proposition
187; Proposition 227; Refugee Relief Act of 1953; Refugees and racial/ethnic
relations.

The Law: Federal legislation that made it easier for political refugees to enter
the United States
Date: August 7, 1953
Immigration issues: Laws and treaties; Refugees
Significance: Enacted in the aftermath of World War II, which displaced

millions of people from their homes in Europe, the Refugee Relief Act cre-
ated a legal means for admitting displaced persons outside the national
quota system, on an emergency basis.
The events of World War II and its immediate aftermath left millions of
people displaced from their homelands. Included among those who had
been made homeless by the destruction were Jewish survivors of the Nazi-
perpetrated Holocaust and increasing numbers of political refugees who fled
their homelands as communist governments took control in eastern Europe.
In the United States, from the close of World War II well into the 1950’s, a de-
bate raged about how restrictive or generous U.S. immigration and asylum
law should be in view of the nation’s own interests and the larger humanitar-
ian imperatives.
Since 1924, U.S. immigration law had been based on a quota system, which
was viewed as highly discriminatory against various countries and peoples.
Under the pressures of war, however, Congress had allowed temporary immi-
gration to help labor-starved industry. With China as one of the main U.S. al-
lies in the Pacific theater of World War II, Congress revoked the ban on Chi-
nese immigration in 1943; in 1945, it approved the War Brides Act, which
permitted the entry of the alien spouses and children of members of the U.S.
armed forces. President Harry S. Truman approved the admission of about
forty thousand wartime refugees after the war and urged Congress to adopt
less restrictive legislation that would permit the resettlement of larger num-
bers of displaced persons (DPs).
Congress felt pressure to act, not only from the president but also from pri-
vate charitable agencies that sought to liberalize admission policies in favor
614
of DPs in Europe and elsewhere. Two Jewish aid agencies, the American
Council on Judaism (ACJ) and the American Jewish Committee (AJC), joined
forces with numerous Christian and other non-Jewish agencies to form the
Citizens’ Committee on Displaced Persons. This new group was headed by
Earl G. Harrison and included on its board of directors many prominent U.S.
citizens, among them Eleanor Roosevelt. The committee heavily lobbied the
predominantly restrictionist Congress and supported legislation calling for
the admission of 400,000 DPs.
A long and rancorous debate followed, which produced a substantially
watered-down bill known as the Displaced Persons Act of 1948. This act per-
mitted 202,000 admission slots for DPs in Europe who feared to return to
communist-held countries. While retaining the immigration quotas of previ-
ous years, the act allowed countries to borrow against future years’ quotas to
accommodate DPs with immediate needs. It only permitted entry of people
displaced prior to April 21, 1947, in the Allied occupied zones of Germany
and Austria who were registered with the International Refugee Organiza-
tion (IRO) and who were not communists. It required that the DPs be guaran-
teed employment by U.S. charitable agencies or other sponsors, and it gave
preference to DPs with professional skills. While criticizing its discriminatory
features, Truman signed the legislation, which also established the Displaced
Persons Commission.
Efforts by the Citizens’ Committee on Displaced Persons and others to lib-
eralize the Displaced Persons Act continued, as events in Europe and the
deepening of the Cold War led to a climate more supportive of DP resettle-
ment. Although delayed by Senator Patrick A. McCarran of Nevada, amend-
ments eventually passed by Congress expanded the numbers of admission
slots to 341,000 and relaxed the cutoff dates for eligibility and entry into the
United States. When the Displaced Persons Act expired on December 31,
1951, President Truman relied on the regular immigration quotas and on the
U.S. Escapee Program, established under the authority of the 1951 Mutual
Security Act, to provide asylum in the United States to political refugees from
communism. Truman also established a Commission on Immigration and
Naturalization, which held hearings that demonstrated considerable support
for liberalized admission of refugees from communism.
Even as the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, sponsored by Senator
McCarran (and therefore often called the McCarran-Walter Act), reempha-
sized the restrictive quota system for regular immigration, consensus was
building to place emergency refugee admissions outside the regular immi-
gration quota system. The Refugee Relief Act of 1953, also sometimes re-
ferred to as the Church bill because of the strong support it received from
religious refugee assistance agencies, was the result of this ongoing debate
about how to restructure U.S. immigration and refugee policy.
The Refugee Relief Act of 1953 made 209,000 special immigrant visas avail-
able to refugees and other special categories of persons. These were not tied
in any way to the regular immigration quotas for countries under the 1952
615
Immigration and Nationality Act. This was seen as a major reform by private
humanitarian organizations. In the years that followed, the 1953 act enabled
the emergency entry of refugees from communism. President Dwight D. Ei-
senhower, for example, invoked the act just before it was to expire, to provide
emergency resettlement opportunities for Hungarian refugees in the waning
months of 1956. Eisenhower also took advantage of his parole power, as ac-
knowledged during the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act and earlier im-
migration legislation, to provide asylum opportunities for Hungarian refu-
gees. The United States eventually accepted more than thirty-two thousand
Hungarians. Thus, through the provisions of the Refugee Relief Act of 1953,
subsequent ad hoc emergency refugee legislation, and the Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952, the U.S. government coped with refugee admissions
until 1980, when Congress passed the more comprehensive and progressive
Migration and Refugee Act.
The Refugee Relief Act of 1953 was one brief but essential mechanism by
which the U.S. government sought to fulfill humanitarian and political objec-
tives relating to refugees. It represented an improvement on the Displaced Per-
sons Act, although that much-maligned piece of legislation eventually led to
the resettlement of about four hundred thousand persons to the United States,
by far the single largest number of European refugees resettled by any country
in the immediate postwar era. The Refugee Relief Act of 1953 also represented
a bridge to later legislation, such as the Migration and Refugee Act of 1980, by
treating emergency refugee admission outside the context of regular immi-
gration quotas. It also represented the mistaken belief during the early 1950’s
that refugee situations were temporary and amendable to ad hoc solutions.
During the early 1950’s, the United States and other Western nations es-
tablished the groundwork for more stable legal and institutional mechanisms
for dealing with refugee situations. The United States supported the creation
of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration in 1943 and
the IRO in 1947 to cope with the needs of displaced persons and refugees in
postwar Europe. Both were viewed as temporary agencies, as were the United
Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Intergovernmen-
tal Committee for European Migration (ICEM), which began operations in
1952. In time, however, these bodies developed into permanent features of
the international humanitarian landscape with the support of later U.S. ad-
ministrations.
The building of both legal and institutional mechanisms for coping with
humanitarian problems was often highly controversial, heavily steeped in po-
litical motivation, and shortsighted. As measured in the huge numbers of per-
sons assisted and protected over the years, however, the efforts are viewed by
many as precious if difficult ones, of which the Displaced Persons Act of 1948
and the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 were imperfect but necessary compo-
nents.
Robert F. Gorman
616
Further Reading
Carlin, James L. The Refugee Connection: A Lifetime of Running a Lifeline. New
York: Macmillan, 1989. Fascinating autobiographical account of the devel-
opment of post-World War II displaced persons and refugee policy.
law.
Half-Open Door, 1945 to Present. New York: Free Press, 1986. The first two
chapters of this comprehensive analysis of U.S. immigration and refugee
policy address the Displaced Persons and Refugee Relief Acts.
Nichols, J. Bruce. The Uneasy Alliance: Religion, Refugee Work, and U.S. Foreign
Policy. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1989. A detailed account
of the relations between private voluntary organizations and the U.S. gov-
ernment in the fields of humanitarian aid, immigration, and refugee pol-
icy. See especially chapter 5.
Sanders, Ronald. Shores of Refuge: A Hundred Years of Jewish Immigration. New
York: Schocken Books, 1988. This detailed historical account briefly exam-
ines the impact of U.S. refugee acts on Jewish immigration.
Zucker, Norman L., and Naomi Flink Zucker. The Guarded Gate: The Reality of
American Refugee Policy. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987. Fo-
cuses mainly on refugee and asylum policy after the passage of the 1980 Mi-
gration and Refugee Act, but situates this discussion against developments
after World War II.
See also Immigration Act of 1943; Immigration and Nationality Act of

1952; Refugee fatigue; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations.
617
Refugees and racial/ethnic relations
Refugees and racial/

ethnic relations
Immigration issues: Nativism and racism; Refugees
Significance: The controversies attending large refugee flows into the United
States have been both a product of and a determinant of U.S. refugee pol-
icy. Fears of increased cultural and racial heterogeneity and the perceived
international political interests of the United States have affected public
policy and practice in this area.
Refugees are viewed by some factions within the white majority population in
the United States as being relatively nonaffluent and unwilling to assimilate
to American culture. Furthermore, these factions and some well-established
minority groups have expressed resentment over the success of the “ethnic
enclave” strategy that has created significant local political power and pros-
perity for more recently arrived groups. In addition, some refugee groups
have expressed anger at the perceived discriminatory application of refugee
legislation. The result has been an exacerbation of tensions across racial and
ethnic lines.
History of U.S. Refugee Policy In 1951, the United Nations held the
Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which established the still-
accepted definition of a refugee and prohibited “refoulement,” that is, forc-
ible repatriation. The United States was instrumental in establishing that to
be a refugee, a person must be fleeing personal governmental persecution,
not economic deprivation. This definition served U.S. Cold War interests by
embarrassing new communist regimes that were generating large refugee
populations. However, the United States did not sign the convention, prefer-
ring to handle asylum issues through domestic legislation.
Throughout the 1950’s, the United States avoided making commitments
to refugees that were of little political value to the nation. The ideological fo-
cus of U.S. refugee policy that developed throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s is
illustrated by the fact that from the mid-1950’s through 1979, only 0.3 percent
of refugee admissions were to people from noncommunist countries.
“Political” vs. “Economic” Refugees U.S. legislation still extends asy-

lum to “political refugees,” but those fleeing bad economies are termed “eco-
nomic migrants” and are deported if they immigrate illegally. Awareness is
growing that governmental oppression, economic malaise, and widespread
social problems often go hand in hand, making it increasingly difficult to dis-
entangle the reasons that people leave their homelands. Many displaced peo-
618
ple are fleeing reigns of terror perpetuated by their governments, ethnic con-
flicts, civil wars, and systematic and severe economic deprivation, but these
people are not technically eligible for asylum. Although it seems clear that
unprecedented numbers of forcibly displaced people are inadequately pro-
tected, the official recognition of a broader definition of “refugee” is unlikely
because of the undeniable economic and perceived social and cultural costs
of growing populations of people who have received asylum.
The U.S. government has become increasingly concerned about the dra-
matically increasing numbers of asylum seekers, especially those who enter
the country illegally, outside of established refugee-processing channels. The
government’s position is understandable, as is that of the illegal entrants. For
example, from 1980 to the early 1990’s, hundreds of thousands of Salvador-
ans fled in the face of death squads that had murdered their relatives and as-
sociates, and a similar situation existed in Guatemala. Yet, during this period,
Homeless Italian earthquake refugees on their way to America during the early twentieth century.
619
only fifty-four Salvadorans and no Guatemalans were accepted for resettle-

ment in the United States, in spite of the fact that Central American refugee
camps could assist only a small fraction of these people. Many of those re-
maining entered the United States illegally.
Charges of Political and Racial Bias U.S. refugee policy was openly
directed by Cold War considerations until 1980. Although there was some
criticism of the U.S. refusal to extend asylum to those fleeing the regimes of
U.S.-supported authoritarian leaders—the shah of Iran (Muhammad Reza
Pahlavi), François “Papa Doc” Duvalier in Haiti, General Augusto Pinochet in
Chile, and President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines—the flow of refu-
gees was controlled, and a possible domestic political backlash avoided.
The 1980 Refugee Act removed the requirement that refugees be fleeing
communist regimes. That year, 800,000 immigrants and refugees entered the
United States legally, a number that surpassed the combined total for the rest
of the world. Growing sentiment for more restrictive policies emerged. The
administration of President Ronald Reagan responded by reducing refugee
admissions by two-thirds and heavily favoring those from communist coun-
tries, in spite of the new law. The Mariel boatlift (1980) brought 115,000 Cu-
bans to the United States in five months, and the policy of forcibly returning
Haitians, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans to brutal governments while admit-
ting less physically threatened refugees from communist countries was soundly
criticized in some quarters.
The differential treatment accorded asylum seekers from Haiti and Cuba
has generated charges of racial bias. As tens of thousands of desperate Hai-
tians were deported or detained at sea and returned before reaching the
United States, the U.S. government welcomed hundreds of thousands of Cu-
bans fleeing Fidel Castro’s regime. The Congressional Black Caucus set up a
task force to study the issue and, after failing to change the U.S. policy, joined
prominent church leaders and the Voluntary Agencies Responsible for Ref-
ugees in stating publicly that racism was behind the differential treatment of
Haitians and other asylum seekers because of a reluctance on the part of the
United States to admit large numbers of black refugees. Even as this contro-
versy raged, the government announced that all Vietnamese and Laotians
who reached safe haven would be considered refugees, while those fleeing
Haiti were subjected to case-by-case screening and deportation.
President George Bush continued Reagan’s policies. After the fall of the
government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti created an upsurge of “boat
people,” the Bush administration successfully petitioned the Supreme Court
to lift a ban on forced repatriation and intercepted and returned tens of thou-
sands of Haitians. The administration of President Bill Clinton continued
this practice and then forced the reinstatement of the Aristide government in
an effort to stem the flow of refugees.
Jack Carter
620
Further Reading
Briggs, Vernon M., Jr., and Stephen Moore. Still an Open Door? U.S. Immigra-
tion Policy and the American Economy. Washington, D.C.: American University
Press, 1994. Discusses the effect of growing restrictionist sentiment on ref-
ugee policy in the United States.
Edmonston, Barry, and Jeffrey S. Passel, eds. Immigration and Ethnicity: The In-
tegration of America’s Newest Arrivals. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute
Press, 1994. Examination of assimilation issues and controversies.
with an emphasis on cultural and social trends, with attention to ethnic
conflicts, nativism, and racialist theories.
law.
Loescher, Gil, ed. Refugees and the Asylum Dilemma in the West. University Park:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992. Set of essays addressing refugee-
related problems and policies in Western nations, including the United
States and Canada.
Loescher, Gil, and Robert Scanlan. Calculated Kindness: Refugees and America’s
Half-Open Door, 1945 to Present. New York: Free Press, 1986. Study of U.S.
refugee policy from World War II through the mid-1980’s.
Reitz, Jeffrey G., eds. Host Societies and the Reception of Immigrants. La Jolla,
nia, San Diego, 2003. Collection of articles on interactions between immi-
grants and other members of their new societies in countries around the
world, including the United States and Canada. Emphasis is on large ur-
ban societies. Includes chapters on African Americans and immigrants in
New York City.
can Americans.

Cuban refugee policy; Melting pot; Refugee fatigue; Refugee Relief Act of
1953; Vietnamese immigrants.
621
Russian immigrants
Russian immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Russia

grants
Significance: Russian Americans have blended well with mainstream Ameri-

can society, many having peasant or industrial backgrounds similar to
those of other European immigrants, while others were refugees from the
Russian upper class or Jews who did not consider themselves Russian.
Some immigrants were, however, suspected of promoting communism or
being members of the Russian mafia.
Throughout the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, large numbers of

Russians immigrated in successive waves to the United States and Canada.
Many were members of the Russian Orthodox Church, and Orthodoxy re-
mains one of the visible hallmarks of Russian immigrant communities. Its rit-
uals and teachings are followed in Russian communities in Alaska, Los An-
geles, and Brooklyn’s Brighton Beach. Nevertheless, Russian Jews were, and
are, numerically the largest group of immigrants, particularly to the United
States. However, because Russia was not very accepting of Jews, many of these
immigrants were more likely to identify themselves as Jews rather than Rus-
sians upon entering the United States and Canada. In addition, because
Siberians preparing to emigrate to the United States in 1910. (Library of Congress)
622
Russian immigrants
Soviet and Russian Immigration

to the United States, 1821-2003
170,000 Russian
160,000 Revolution
150,000 of 1905-1906
140,000 Russian
130,000 Revolution
120,000 of 1917
110,000 1991
1918-1921
100,000 Civil war Collapse
90,000 of Soviet
80,000 1921 Union
Creation
70,000 1946-1989
of Soviet
60,000 Union Cold War
50,000
40,000 1939-1945
30,000 World War II
20,000
10,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
many came from western Russia, the so-called Pale of Settlement to which
Russian Jews were restricted, which was once part of Poland-Lithuania, they
might equally well have considered themselves Polish or Lithuanian Jews.
The first Russians to reach the shores of North America came as traders,
adventurers, and explorers. These hardy fur traders and missionaries settled
the Alaskan wilderness when that territory belonged to Russia. The first Rus-
sians settled on Kodiak Island, Alaska, in 1784, and converted many local peo-
ple to the Russian Orthodox religion, which many still practiced during the
early twenty-first century. However, with the sale of Alaska to the United
States in 1867, many of these first settlers returned to Russia.
The First Wave A huge influx of immigrants from czarist Russia reached
North America between 1881 and 1914. Almost half of these were Jews fleeing
pogroms and other forms of persecution following the 1881 assassination of
Czar Alexander III, for which the Jews were blamed. During this period, Jews
were allowed to live only in the Pale of Settlement in western Russia, lands
taken from Poland during the partitions of Poland a hundred years earlier.
623
Russian immigrants
A Russian Jew in New York City during the early twentieth century. (Library of Congress)
Most of these Jews lived in shtetls, and many were impoverished. Only about
sixty-five thousand ethnic Russians left Russia during this period, most for
economic reasons. Others, from the Carpathian area of the Ukraine and the
eastern reaches of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, did self-identify as Russians
and were adherents of the Orthodox or the Uniate religion.
The Second Wave The second wave of immigration occurred as a result of

events in Russia that made it impossible for many persons, particularly mem-
bers of the upper classes, to remain there. These events were the Bolshevik
Revolution of October 1917 and the ensuing Russian Civil War. More than
two million people fled the new communist nation, many to the Balkans,
western Europe, and Manchuria. Of these, approximately thirty thousand
came to the United States. Among them were former White Russian soldiers
(as opposed to the Red Communist armies), aristocrats, clergy, artists, and in-
tellectuals. United in their hatred of the Bolsheviks, many intended to stay
only until the Bolsheviks were ousted. Ironically, anticommunist movements
in the United States often singled out these extremely anticommunist Rus-
sians for oppressive treatment, suspecting that a communist lurked behind
every fur hat.
The Third Wave A small wave of Russian immigration resulted from the
massive dislocations of World War II. Germany had at various times occupied
much of the Soviet Union, captured many Russians, and made them work in
forced labor camps. After the war, many of these people were forcibly returned
624
Russian immigrants
to the Soviet Union, where they were often accused of collaboration with the
enemy. Others, fearing similar oppression, chose to remain in displaced-
person camps in Germany and Austria until they were allowed to immigrate
to North America. This brought approximately twenty thousand Russians to
the shores of North America.
The Fourth Wave In contrast to earlier emigrations from Russia and the
Soviet Union, these immigrants left Russia near the end of the twentieth cen-
tury without hindrance on the part of the government in power. The impetus
for this emigration was in large part agreements between the United States
and the Soviet Union allowing Jews to leave Russia, nominally for Israel, but
often in fact for the United States. Following their lead, a number of other
Russians emigrated as well. This migration caused some social disturbances
in the United States because a number of Russian mafia members who were
among the newcomers caused major problems for newly arrived immigrants
and the population at large.
Gloria Fulton
Further Reading
ern immigrants from many nations, including Russia.
Hardwick, Susan Wiley. Russian Refuge: Religion, Migration, and Settlement on the
North American Pacific Rim. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Ex-
ploration of religious reasons behind Russian immigration to the United
States.
Magocsi, Paul R. The Russian Americans. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. Traces
the immigration and settlement of Russians in North America, focusing on
historical and economic issues, the people who might be considered Rus-
sian Americans, and the extent to which these peoples have become assim-
ilated in North American society.
Shasha, Dennis Elliott, and Marina Shron. Red Blues: Voices from the Last Wave of
Russian Immigrants. New York: Holmes & Meier, 2002. Study of post-Cold
War Russian immigration to the United States.
Wertsman, Vladimir, ed. The Russians in America: A Chronology and Fact Book.
Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publications, 1977. Now dated but still useful
reference book on Russians in the United States.
See also Eastern European Jewish immigrants; European immigrant liter-

ature; Garment industry; Mail-order brides; Polish immigrants; Soviet Jewish
immigrants.
625
Sacco and Vanzetti trial

The Event: Robbery and murder trial of two Italian immigrants
Date: 1920-1921
Place: Dedham, Massachusetts
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Nativism and racism
Significance: One of the most famous U.S. trials of the twentieth century,
the robbery and murder case against Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Van-
zetti, generated worldwide protests, strikes, and riots as it focused the in-
ternational spotlight on the small town of Dedham, Massachusetts. The
trial was a celebrated example of anti-immigrant feeling during a period of
heightened nativism.
The two events, which may or may not have been connected, that culminated
in the arrest of Sacco and Vanzetti began on December 24, 1919, payday for
the L. Q. White Shoe Company of Bridgewater, Massachusetts. A truck carry-
ing approximately thirty-three thousand dollars in company payroll was un-
successfully attacked. Pinkerton Agency detectives investigated the incident,
and during eyewitness interviews they determined that one of the suspects
appeared to be foreign-born, with a dark complexion and mustache, and that
he fled in a large vehicle, probably a Hudson. The identified license plate had
been stolen a few days earlier in Needham, Massachusetts, as had a Buick
touring car. Thus, despite witnesses to the contrary, the detectives concluded
that the Buick likely had been used in the robbery. No suspects were arrested,
although tips emerged connecting the getaway car to a group of Italian anar-
chists.
On April 15, 1920, in nearby South Braintree, the payroll for the Slater and
Morrill Shoe Factory was being escorted, on foot, from the office to the fac-
tory by two security guards, Frederick Parmenter and Alessandro Berardelli.
En route, the guards were attacked, robbed, and murdered by two men who
escaped in a waiting vehicle. At the inquest, twenty-three eyewitnesses testi-
fied that the assailants appeared to be Italian, but few claimed they could pos-
itively identify the men.
Recalling the tip about Italian anarchists storing a car in Bridgewater, po-
lice chief Michael E. Stewart traced the lead to Feruccio Coacci, an Italian
scheduled for deportation. Coacci revealed that the car belonged to his
housemate, Mike Boda, a known anarchist, and that it was currently being re-
paired in a garage in West Bridgewater. A police guard was planted outside
the garage to wait for Boda.
Meanwhile, as a result of the prevalent U.S. attitude toward radicals and in
the wake of a national roundup and arrest of aliens, Italians Nicola Sacco and
Bartolomeo Vanzetti had decided it would be wise to destroy their anarchist
626
literature. The abundance of material required transportation, and they ar-

ranged to borrow Boda’s vehicle. Although the trap was laid for Boda, Sacco
and Vanzetti were arrested as they attempted to claim the car. Neither man
had a police record, but both were armed.
Because the men were not informed of the reason for their arrest, they as-
sumed they were being held as anarchists. Although they were read their
rights, the language barrier may have obstructed their complete understand-
ing. They were fingerprinted, their weapons confiscated but not tagged, and
they were questioned for seven days without being charged. There was no
lineup; the two were paraded in front of witnesses who were asked if they were
the men involved in the holdup. On May 12, 1920, Vanzetti was charged with
attempted murder and robbery at Bridgewater.
The Trials Vanzetti’s trial began on June 22, 1920, in Plymouth, Massa-
chusetts, with Judge Webster Thayer presiding. The initial interviews by the
Pinkerton detectives were not admitted, and all witnesses for the defense
were of Italian origin. After only five hours of deliberation, the jury found
Vanzetti guilty of assault with intent to rob and murder. Six weeks later, he was
sentenced to twelve to fifteen years for intent to rob. The attempted murder
charge was dropped after it was discovered that one of the jurors had brought
his own shell casings for comparison.
In September, 1920, Sacco and Vanzetti were charged with the murder of
Alessandro Berardelli and Frederick Parmenter during the South Braintree
robbery. Each pleaded not guilty. A committee for their defense raised enough
money to hire the radical California attorney Fred Moore, who cited the case
as an establishment attempt to victimize the working man.
In 1976, the Community Church of Boston began honoring the memory of Sacco and Vanzetti by
presenting the annual Sacco-Vanzetti Memorial Award for Contributions to Social Justice to out-
standing social activists. (The Community Church of Boston)
627
The new trial began on May 31, 1921, in Dedham, Massachusetts, once
again under Judge Thayer, who, as the presiding judge in Vanzetti’s first trial,
should have been disqualified. On June 4, the all-male jury was sworn in, and
on June 6, Sacco and Vanzetti were marched, handcuffed, into the court-
room. Throughout the trial, the prosecution presented a bounty of circum-
stantial evidence: less-than-convincing “eyewitness” testimony; a cap from the
scene, alleged to be Vanzetti’s, that was too small; expert testimony qualified
with “I am inclined to believe”; no positive identification on the getaway car;
ballistic evidence that was technical and confusing; and the accusation of
“consciousness of guilt,” based on the false statements of the two when they
thought they were being held for anarchy. Judge Thayer charged the jury to
be “true soldiers” who would display the “highest and noblest type of true
American citizenship,” and he referred to the defendants as “slackers.” On
July 14, once again after a five-hour deliberation, the jury returned a verdict
of guilty of first-degree murder. The standard penalty in Massachusetts at the
time was death by electrocution.
Aftermath and Executions Sacco and Vanzetti remained incarcerated

for six years while motions were filed in their behalf. The presiding judge
heard all appeals, and each was weighed and denied by Judge Thayer. One
motion stated Judge Thayer himself had demonstrated out-of-court prejudice
against the two. Despite the growing doubt about the guilt of the men, Thayer
remained adamant, and his animosity grew toward Moore. On November 8,
the defense committee forced Moore to resign and hired William G. Thompson.
While the legal avenues encountered roadblocks, Sacco was slipped a note
from another prisoner, Celestino Madeiros, who confessed to the crime.
From the note, Thompson traced a link to the Morelli brothers, an Italian
gang in Providence. This group had attacked the shoe factory in the past, and
one member of the gang bore a resemblance to Sacco. Based on the new evi-
dence, Thompson filed a motion for retrial, which was denied, and in April of
1927, Sacco and Vanzetti were sentenced to die the week of July 10. Due to the
public outcry, the date was moved to August 10, and Vanzetti wrote a plea for
clemency to Massachusetts governor Alvan T. Fuller. In the letter, he asked
not for pardon but for a complete review of the case.
On June 1, the governor appointed a committee to review the case, but af-
ter examining their findings, he denied a new trial. On August 10, Sacco and
Vanzetti were readied for execution. Thirty-six minutes before the time set
for the execution, the governor issued a postponement, awaiting results of a
Supreme Court appeal. On August 19, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to
hear the case, citing no authority.
In Europe and South America, mobs rioted and marched on U.S. embas-
sies. In France, Italy, and the United States, workers struck in protest. Five
hundred extra policemen, armed with machine guns and tear gas, barri-
caded the crowd of thousands outside the jail. Just after midnight, on August
23, 1927, Sacco and Vanzetti were executed.
628
Santería
Public interest in the case lived on, however, as many people continued to
work to clear Sacco and Vanzetti’s names. On August 23, 1977, Massachusetts
governor Michael Dukakis proclaimed the date Sacco and Vanzetti Day, thus
officially removing any stigma from their names.
Joyce Duncan
Further Reading
Dickinson, Alice. The Sacco-Vanzetti Case. New York: Franklin Watts, 1972. An
abbreviated overview of the case, including chronology and photos.
Ehrmann, Herbert. The Case That Will Not Die: Commonwealth vs. Sacco and
Vanzetti. Boston: Little, Brown, 1969. Liberally illustrated account by the
case’s assistant defense attorney from 1926 to 1927.
Frankfurter, Marion Denman, and Gardner Jackson, eds. The Letters of Sacco
and Vanzetti. New York: Octagon Books, 1971. Correspondence by both
men written from prison, including Vanzetti’s letter to the governor.
Joughin, G. L., and E. M. Morgan. The Legacy of Sacco and Vanzetti. New York:
Harcourt, Brace, 1948. Early but masterful analysis of the case.
Russell, Francis. Tragedy in Dedham. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962. Illustrated
chronological recitation of events, including a discussion of public tem-
perament.
Weeks, Robert, ed. Commonwealth vs. Sacco and Vanzetti. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, 1958. Provides insights from court records and other primary-
source documents on the trial of the reputed anarchists.
See also Euro-Americans; Italian immigrants; Nativism.
Santería
Identification: Afro-Cuban religion
Immigration issues: African Americans; Cuban immigrants; Latino immi-

grants; Religion; Slavery; West Indian immigrants
Significance: Santería is a cultural retention with origins in the African dias-

pora to the New World. Its existence is an example of the survival of ele-
ments of African cultures, despite the destructive forces of involuntary mi-
gration and slavery.
The basic tenets, rituals, practices, and associated institutional mechanisms

of Santería derive from the Yoruba priests and priestesses of the orishas, who
were slaves at the close of the eighteenth and during the early decades of the
629
Scandinavian immigrants
nineteenth centuries. Santería, “the way of the saints,” is an admixture of

Yoruba and other African practices with Roman Catholic traditions devel-
oped as a functional adaptation by many Cubans.
The Cuban immigrants who entered the United States after Fidel Castro’s
successful revolution in their homeland brought these religious practices
with them. These rituals enjoy special significance as part of the new immi-
grants’ coping repertoire, enabling them to adjust better to acculturation in
the United States. The practices of Santería are part of the larger spiritualistic
belief system of other black West Indians (Jamaicans, Trinidadians, Haitians,
Puerto Ricans, and Guyanese) who immigrated to the United States. As these
immigrants begin to live in urban spatial proximity and strive to maintain and
regain their African cultural heritage, they and native African Americans
have adopted Santería. In cities such as Miami and New York, there are many
spiritual adherents.
Aubrey W. Bonnett
Further Reading
Boswell, Thomas D., and James R. Curtis. The Cuban American Experience.
Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Allanheld, 1983.
Oxford University Press, 1999.

Haitian immigrants; West Indian immigrants.
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Western Europe’s Scan-
dinavian peninsula, which contains Sweden and Norway
Immigration issues: Demographics; European immigrants
Significance: Scandinavians were the earliest known European immigrants

to North America, and modern Scandinavian Americans still have strong
links to their cultural heritages.
The earliest European immigrants to the Western Hemisphere are believed

to have been Vikings of Scandinavian origin. In 986 c.e., a Norse expedition
headed by Bjarni Herjolfsson sighted land thought to have been on the east
coast of Canada. It was followed some dozen years later by Leif Eriksson, who
made landing. Norse expeditions attempted to colonize Vinland (Newfound-
630
Scandinavian Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
70,000
65,000
60,000
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
land) in 1003-1006 and 1007-1008 but ultimately failed because of infighting

and conflicts with the native communities. These and subsequent expedi-
tions did not result in permanent settlements on the North American conti-
nent.
The first documented Scandinavian settlements in North America were
Swedish and included a community along the Delaware River in 1638. John
Hanson, the first president of the Continental Congress, claimed to be a
fourth-generation descendant of immigrants who traced their family ties to
Swedish royalty. Early Swedish enclaves founded in Delaware (Maryland),
Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania still maintain their cultural affil-
iations.
The Nineteenth Century In nineteenth century Scandinavia, social and

economic conditions were stifling: Primogeniture ensured that only first sons
could inherit their families’ estates, land foreclosures abounded, and the
nobility controlled much of the property and paid few taxes. Cleng Peerson
(originally Kleng Peterson Hesthammer), a dissenter persecuted by the Lu-
theran State Church of Norway, left for the United States in 1821. He became
631
so enamored of the United States that he purchased a sloop, the Restauration,

and began a career as an immigrant agent.
Peerson and other agents helped bring about a historically unparalleled
exodus of citizens from both Sweden and Norway. Approximately 750,000
Norwegians emigrated to North America between 1849 and 1914; the Swed-
ish exodus during this same period totaled approximately 1.2 million, nearly
one-fourth of Sweden’s population. By 1890, about four hundred Minnesota
towns sported Swedish names, and Norwegian-speaking travelers in North
Dakota could find more people who spoke their native language than who
spoke English.
Seafarers historically, Norwegians founded communities on both coasts, in
places such as Massachusetts and the Pacific Northwest. Many also followed
Peerson to Texas to bask in the milder climate. Others were attracted to the
open lands of the upper Midwest, particularly after the Homestead Act of
1862 allotted 160 acres of newly opened land to anyone who could “prove up”
a claim. Some enterprising couples positioned their bedrooms, and even
their conjugal beds, exactly on the property line between two allotments in
order to qualify for both allotments, or 320 acres.
Religious Influences Both Swedish and Norwegian immigrants carried

with them a religious faith that saturated every aspect of their existence. It
shaped their behavior, the cycle of their daily lives, and even their community
identities. Both groups came from heavily Lutheran environments, where the
mandate of “the Word alone, grace alone, faith alone” translated to immedi-
ate personal responsibility to God.
Lutheranism, however, was not always a uniting influence for Scandina-
vians. Subdivisions within the church, called synods, reflected ethnic affili-
ations. The Swedish Lutherans supported the Augustana synod, and Nor-
wegian Lutheranism included at least six synods. Some of the Norwegian
Lutherans were followers of Hans Neilsen Hauge, a reformer who experi-
enced a call to preach the gospel to Norway while working on his farm. His
American followers were pious and hardworking, separating themselves from
those whom they regarded as frivolous. Haugeans, for example, abstained
from dancing, believing that it facilitated contact between the sexes that was
fraught with temptation and spiritual peril.
Swedish Covenant, Methodist, Baptist, Mormon, and a few Roman Catho-
lic denominations also attracted both Swedish and Norwegian immigrants,
and each group took their differences seriously. Haugeans, especially, ab-
horred anything resembling Roman Catholicism, while Catholics regarded
Lutherans as spiritual heretics deprived of ritual. Interfaith marriages, when
they did occur, alienated entire families; moving to different ethnic or reli-
gious communities could result in social isolation. In many instances, an un-
married pregnant woman was not allowed to marry the father of her child if
he was not of her religion.
The Swedish and Norwegian pioneers’ work ethic was also rooted in their
632
religious orientation. Both groups frowned on complainers; both subscribed

to biblical passages reminding the faithful that labor was an opportunity be-
stowed by God. Sunday Sabbath, however, was observed with diligence—any
activity resembling work, even use of scissors or knitting needle, was avoided,
and a farmer who worked in his fields on a Sunday invited general disap-
proval. Sundays were devoted to worship and visiting with neighbors.
Intergroup Relations Despite the many traits and attitudes they shared,
Norwegians and Swedes preserved distance from each other, both socially
and theologically. Norwegians tended to view Swedes as somewhat undisci-
plined, and Swedes typically regarded Norwegians as cold and dour. A ceme-
tery might well have separate sections for each ethnicity; the family of one
Norwegian woman, for example, was disappointed that she had to be buried
in the Swedish section of a cemetery because she had married a Swedish man.
The Scandinavians’ relationships with other immigrant groups were usu-
ally civil and often amicable. As long as ethnic boundaries coincided with
those of cities and schools, mutual respect prevailed. Sometimes, however,
school athletic rivalries became metaphors for national differences, as exem-
plified by the rivalry between two small towns in southern Minnesota, one
predominantly Polish Catholic and the other, Norwegian Lutheran. Rivalries
Poster for a popular late 1890’s stage play that built its humor on exaggerated stereotypes of
Scandinavian immigrants by depicting its title character as a big, simple-minded, and good-
natured oaf. The image at the right shows Yonson about to be victimized by hustlers after his arrival
in New York. During the 1960’s, the name “Yon Yonson” was again popularized, this time in a musi-
cal ditty that begins, “My name is Yon Yonson/ I come from Visconsin. . . . ” (Library of Congress)
633
persisted for years, often to the point that character traits were assumed, by
each side, to correlate with place of residence. The two small schools did not
consolidate until the latter part of the twentieth century.
The ethnic and national boundaries began to blur in the twentieth cen-
tury. Within the Lutheran Church, ethnic and synodical mergers began to
bring Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Germans, and Finns together in worship.
Automotive mobility brought together groups of people who had never been
face to face before. Religious intermarriages were no longer exotic, much less
reprehensible.
However, there was one group with whom the Scandinavian Americans did
not get along: the Native Americans. The Native Americans in the areas
where Scandinavian Americans settled saw no particular advantage in the
mainstream society’s intruding into theirs. The Scandinavian immigrants,
like other settlers, viewed American Indians’ lifestyle as anachronistic and in
need of “civilizing.” They defined civilization in terms of religious conver-
sion, manifested by “whitening” of dress and behavior.
A church worker involved in relations between Indian tribes and Scandi-
navian Americans noted that Norwegians, particularly, were in cultural op-
position to the Native Americans. Norwegians were insular, while Native
Americans were committed to their communities. Norwegians avoided de-
pendence on others, while to the Native Americans, giving honored both the
giver and the recipient. Many of these differences contributed to the cultural
separation that persisted into the twenty-first century between Scandinavian
Americans and American Indians, particularly in towns bordering Indian res-
ervations.
Although Scandinavian Americans initially sought to immerse themselves
totally in the mainstream culture, they gradually took steps to preserve their
culture. The colleges they built preserved their ethnic and doctrinal defini-
tions, until, following the path of the ethnic small towns, they, too, became
more inclusive. Swedish and Norwegian Americans also established museums
and hosted festivals and found them to be not only personally but also eco-
nomically bountiful. Ethnicity, once a stigma, was now a distinction.
Brenda E. Reinertsen Caranicas
Further Reading

1892; German and Irish immigration of the 1840’s; German immigrants; Lit-
erature.
634
Scotch-Irish immigrants
Scotch-Irish immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from Ireland who were of
Protestant Scots descent
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Irish immigrants
Significance: The Scotch-Irish immigrants who came to North America and

settled on the western frontier in the eighteenth century initially thought
of themselves simply as Irish; however, as American nativist sentiments
turned against the predominantly Roman Catholic Irish who began immi-
grating in large numbers during the early nineteenth century, they started
calling themselves “Scotch-Irish” to dissociate themselves from the new-
comers.
Now more commonly known as “Scots-Irish,” the Scotch-Irish originated

largely from Ulster, the northern counties of Ireland. Their immigration to
North America began around 1695 and continued through the early nine-
teenth century, the largest wave arriving between 1717 and 1775. These con-
sisted of native Ulster Protestants and Scots who had settled Ulster. Mostly
Presbyterian, they brought to the New World a strong Calvinist tradition. Some
may originally have been Roman Catholic but adopted Protestantism after ar-
rival, in response to social prohibitions on Catholicism. Desires for land and
religious freedom were the primary motives for immigration. Edged out by
English settlers for arable land in the low country, the Scotch-Irish traveled
the wagon roads that led to the western areas of Virginia and the Carolinas.
The Scotch-Irish developed a reputation for being rugged, devout, and
fiercely independent, leaving a stamp on the regions they pioneered. Past ex-
periences created a deep suspicion of authority among the Scotch-Irish. A
majority of Scotch-Irish Americans supported the American Revolution and
later backed the Confederacy in the Civil War.
Although early Scotch-Irish settlers referred to themselves simply as “Irish,”
the term “Scotch-Irish” came into use in the nineteenth century, as Protestant
Irish disdained identification with a newer group of immigrant Catholic Irish,
a visible immigrant community by the late nineteenth century. As such, the
Scotch-Irish may be properly classified as a subculture.
Gene Redding Wynne, Jr.
Further Reading
Coffey, Michael, ed. The Irish in America. New York: Disney Enterprises, 1997.
Fallows, Marjorie. Irish Americans: Identity and Assimilation. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979.
ner’s Sons, 1981.
635
Sephardic Jews
McCaffrey, Lawrence J. The Irish Diaspora in America. Washington, D.C.: Catho-

lic University of America Press, 1984.
Irish immigrants and discrimination; Irish stereotypes.
Sephardic Jews
Identification: Jews who follow the liturgy and customs developed by Jews
in medieval Spain and Portugal as well as Babylonian Jewish traditions
Immigration issues: European immigrants; Jewish immigrants; Religion
Significance: An upper class consisting mostly of intellectuals and members

of the business elite, Sephardic Jews were the first Jewish immigrants to
North America.
Sephardic Jews (derived from sepharad, a place of exile) have a proud multi-
cultural heritage that combines Islamic and Christian influences. Members
have published biblical commentaries, literature, and works on science, phi-
losophy, and legal issues. Persecuted by Roman Catholics during the Inquisi-
tion, they were forced to become Christian or face expulsion from the Iberian
Peninsula. Most of them left Spain in 1492 and Portugal in 1497 and settled in
Holland, Brazil (Recife), Martinique, and various islands in the West Indies,
where they prospered as a merchant class.
Sephardic Jews were the first Jewish immigrants to arrive in the North
American colonies. Some historians believe that Sephardic Jews accompa-
nied Columbus on his voyage to America in 1492. Other historical records in-
dicate that in 1634, the Portuguese Jew Mathias de Sousa arrived in Maryland
and established the first American Jewish settlement. Shortly after, another
Sephardim, Jacob Barsimson, arrived in the colonies on a Dutch West India
Company boat. During the mid-seventeenth century, some Sephardic Jews
settled in Rhode Island and Virginia.
In 1654, twenty-three Jewish refugees from Brazil arrived in New Amster-
dam. These refugees were not welcomed by the governor, Peter Stuyvesant,
whom some historians describe as a bigot and anti-Semitic. The policy of tol-
erance for Jews, followed in the Dutch American colonists’ native land, was
applied in the colonies, and the Jews were allowed to remain, but some histo-
rians claim that this deference toward the Jews was primarily sparked by the
colonists’ fear of losing economic benefits in New Amsterdam. The Sephar-
636
September 11 terrorist attacks
dic Jews in New Amsterdam were not allowed to build a temple or practice
their religious beliefs in public; however in 1682, they rented a house for
prayer meetings, and in 1730, the first synagogue, Shearith Israel, was built in
New Amsterdam.
Gradually, Sephardic Jews succeeded in becoming participants in the polit-
ical process. They became a dominant force; however, in the first part of the
nineteenth century they seemed to lose connection with their Jewish ances-
try. Prominent, wealthy Sephardic families moved in the same social circles as
Christian families such as the Rockefellers. Intermarriage with Christians led
to a weakening of Jewish faith and culture among the Sephardic Jews, who re-
mained prominent society members and set standards of morality, education,
and social life. Competition arose between Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews,
who often attended Sephardic synagogues and followed Sephardic ritual.
Language was another barrier; the Sephardi spoke Ladino (medieval Castil-
ian with an admixture of Hebrew), while the Ashkenazi spoke Yiddish (Ger-
man, with an admixture of eastern European languages and Hebrew). Nine-
teenth century American Jews opted to assimilate into the Anglo-Saxon
culture, thereby creating their own brand of Judaism. Sephardic Jews were
soon outnumbered by Ashkenazi immigrants who began to dominate Ameri-
can Jewish culture.
Maria A. Pacino
Further Reading
Wayne State University Press, 1970.
Pool, David de Sola, and Tamara de Sola Pool. An Old Faith in the New World:
Portrait of Shearith Israel, 1654-1954. New York: Columbia University Press,
1955.
immigrants; Jewish settlement of New York; Jews and Arab Americans; Soviet
Jewish immigrants; Twice migrants.
September 11 terrorist
attacks
The Event: Terrorist hijackings of commercial jetliners that were used to kill
several thousand people in attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.
Date: September 11, 2001
Place: New York, New York; Washington, D.C.; rural Pennsylvania
637
The Events of September 11, 2001

At 8:45 a.m. on September, 11, 2001, an airliner flying out of Boston crashed
into the north tower of New York City’s World Trade Center, ripping a hole in
several upper floors and starting a fire so intense that people on higher floors
could not evacuate the building. At first, the crash was believed to be an acci-
dent. However, when a second airliner struck the Trade Center’s south tower
eighteen minutes later, it was clear that neither crash had been accidental.
Fearing that a large-scale terrorist attack was underway, government agencies
shut down local airports, bridges, and tunnels. Less than one hour after the first
crash, the Federal Aviation Administration ordered—for the first time in his-
tory—a stop to all flight operations throughout the United States. Only mo-
ments later, a third airliner crashed into the Pentagon Building outside Wash-
ington, D.C.
Meanwhile, the intense fires in the Trade Center towers—fed by the airlin-
ers’ jet fuel—so weakened the buildings that they could no longer support their
upper floors. At 10:05 a.m., the entire south tower collapsed; twenty-three min-
utes later, the north tower collapsed. Between those events, a fourth airliner
crashed in a field outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
As was later determined, all four airliners had been hijacked by operatives of
a shadowy Middle Eastern organization known as al-Qaeda that was determined
to kill as many Americans and do as much damage to the United States as possi-
ble. By any measure, the scheme was a great success. The cost of the physical
damage of the attacks could be measured in billions of dollars. Although the ex-
tent of human fatalities was not as great as was initially feared, about three thou-
sand people lost their lives—a number greater than all the American fatalities
during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. In addition,
the sense of security from outside threats that Americans had long enjoyed was
shattered. The impact of the terrorist attacks on American attitudes toward im-
migrants would be significant.
Immigration issues: Border control; Civil rights and liberties; Discrimina-

tion; Government and politics; Middle Eastern immigrants
Significance: Often simply called “Nine-Eleven,” the terrorist attacks on the

United States of September 11, 2001, hardened attitudes of the American
public toward immigrants—especially those from the Middle East—and
led to a tightening of border controls.
At the end the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-
first century, more foreign-born people were entering the United States than
at any previous time in the nation’s history. From 1990 through 2001, nearly
12 million people entered the country as legal permanent immigrants. Ap-
proximately 3 million came in as temporary nonimmigrants, and well over
1 million arrived as refugees and political asylum seekers. The population of
illegal, or undocumented, immigrants living in the United States grew from
638
about 5 million people in 1996 to about 7 million in 2000, according to esti-

mates of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Many of the un-
documented immigrants had been admitted as temporary nonimmigrants
and did leave after their visas expired.
While most immigrants and visitors to the United States were job-seekers
or tourists, a tiny minority were radical opponents of American policies. On
September 11, 2001, Islamic radicals living in the United States hijacked four
commercial airliners. They flew two of the planes into the twin towers of New
York City’s World Trade Center, destroying the buildings and killing thou-
sands of people. A third plane hit the Pentagon, the headquarters of the U.S.
military outside Washington, D.C., and a fourth crashed in rural Pennsylva-
nia after a struggle between passengers and hijackers. Of the nineteen hijack-
ers, fifteen were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one
from Lebanon, and one from Egypt. All nineteen had entered the United
States legally, on visas granted by the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-
vice. The events of September 11, 2001, intensified concerns that American
borders had become too open.
Homeland Security and the End of the INS On September 20, only
nine days after the terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush reacted to the
attacks by establishing the Office of Homeland Security, headed by former
Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge. In January, 2002, this cabinet-level office
became the Department of Homeland Security. The new department was in-
Image Not Available
639
Nuns studying the pictures posted in New York City of persons missing after the destruction of the
World Trade Center towers. (Library of Congress)
tended to centralize efforts against terrorism, and the functions of nearly two
dozen already existing agencies were to be brought under the department’s
control.
The INS was one of the agencies placed under Homeland Security. Ori-
ginally created in 1933 from the merger of the Bureau of Immigration and
the Bureau of Naturalization, the INS moved from the Department of Labor
to the Department of Justice in 1940, reflecting a heightened concern over
immigration as a security issue during the years before the United States en-
tered World War II. Security questions once again encouraged change in
2001 and 2002, as many people asked how the nineteen foreign-born perpe-
trators of the September 11 attacks had been allowed to enter the United
States. Concerns that the INS was too lax on security grew more intense after
March, 2002, when news sources reported that not long before the terrorist
attacks, the INS had approved changes in visa statuses, from tourist to stu-
640
dent, for Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi—two of the hijackers who
died piloting planes into the World Trade Center. A year later, on March 1,
2003, the functions and offices of the INS were transferred to U.S. Citizen-
ship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a bureau of the Department of
Homeland Security.
Change in Immigration Policy Almost immediately after September 11,

the federal government began passing new laws to tighten control over immi-
gration. The most important of these laws was Public Law 107-56, whose full
title was “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate
Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,” the USA
PATRIOT Act, or, more simply, the Patriot Act. It was passed by Congress on
October 26, 2001. The act provided new reasons for denying immigrants en-
try into the United States, gave a broader definition to the concept of terror-
ist activity, and increased the number of justifications for deporting visitors
and immigrants. Perhaps most controversially, the Patriot Act gave new pow-
ers to the U.S. attorney general, including the power to detain any persons
the attorney general reasonably suspects of being connected to terrorist ac-
tivity.
In November, 2001, Congress passed the Border Security Act, authorizing
more funds for immigration and customs staff, providing for the sharing of
information on deportation cases among federal agencies, tracking foreign
students, and tightening oversight in other ways. The Department of Justice
also issued a variety of new directives and regulations in the months following
September 11, including interviews with recently arrived Middle Eastern
men and provisions for detaining terrorist suspects. Supporters of the new le-
gal approaches argued that these steps were necessary to combat terrorism.
Critics countered that they constituted an assault on civil liberties. Many ob-
servers also saw the parts of the crack down on terrorism as especially oppres-
sive to Middle Eastern and Muslim immigrants in the United States.
Consequences of Changing Policies Changing immigration policies

had little apparent impact on overall levels of legal permanent migration into
the United States. In 2002, the federal government granted legal immigrant
status to 1,063,732 people, approximately the same number as in the previous
year and more than had been accepted as immigrants in any year since 1991.
The number of immigrants dropped to 705,827 in 2003, but even that figure
was still a larger number of legal immigrants than in either 1998 or 1999. Per-
manent immigration remained fairly stable because the Citizenship and Im-
migration Services bureau was processing people who had applied in earlier
years and because much of the immigration into the United States was based
on the re-unification of family members.
Despite a general overall stability in immigration figures, immigration
from a number of countries with large Islamic populations began an appar-
ent drop. Overall immigration from nations in North Africa and Asia with
641
large or predominantly Islamic populations dropped from a historic high of

nearly 80,000 people in 2001 to under 73,000 in 2002 and to under 52,000 in
2003. The numbers of temporary visitors from Islamic countries dropped
even more noticeably. Visitors from the predominantly Islamic nations of
North Africa and Asia decreased from 1,135,452 in 2001 to 808,322 in 2002
and 745,613 in 2003. Declines in visitors from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab
Emirates, and Egypt were among the most marked. Whereas 66,721 Saudi
Arabians had entered the United States in 2001, only 16,154 came in 2003.
Those arriving from the United Arab Emirates decreased from 17,247 in 2001
to 5,368 in 2003. The numbers of Egyptian visitors went down by almost half:
from 61,826 to 31,430 in 2003.
The new federal policies affected enforcement of laws directed at undocu-
mented immigrants from Islamic countries much more than they affected le-
gal immigration levels. The total number of deportable noncitizens, from all
parts of the world, who were located by American officials actually decreased
steadily from 2000 through 2003. However, numbers of people from Islamic
nations in North Africa and Asia who were classified as subject to deportation
and were located by American officials jumped dramatically from 2,613 in
2001 to 4,902 in 2002 and then to 15,026 in 2003.
Further Reading
Barnett, R. Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty. Princeton,
N.J: Princeton University Press, 2004. Broad essay on the erosion of civil
liberties in the United States after the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001.
Brzezinski, Matthew. Fortress America: On the Frontline of Homeland Security—An
Inside Look at the Coming Surveillance State. New York: Bantam Books, 2004.
Offering both hypothetical and real stories about the war on terror since
September 11, 2001, this book takes a critical look at the Department of
Homeland Security, the sacrificing of civil liberties, and damage done to
international alliances.
visiting aliens.
grants Since 1882. New York: Hill & Wang, 2004. Comprehensive history of
American immigration policy, from the beginnings of a major wave of Eu-
ropean immigration in the late nineteenth century to the years following
the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Elaasar, Aladdin. Silent Victims: The Plight of Arab and Muslim Americans in Post
9/11 America. Bloomington, Ind.: Author House, 2004. Study of the in-
642
Settlement house movement
creased pressures on Arab and other Muslim immigrants to the United

States after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Goldberg, Daniel, Victor Goldberg, and Robert Greenwald. It’s a Free Country:
Personal Freedom in America After September 11. New York: Nation Books,
2003. Forty-one articles and cartoons emphasizing civil liberties issues aris-
ing from antiterrorism efforts.
Leone, Richard C., and Greg Anrig, Jr. The War on Our Freedoms: Civil Liberties
in an Age of Terrorism. New York: BBS PublicAffairs, 2003. Three experts on
civil liberties warn of the consequences of the war on terrorism to Ameri-
can freedoms, while documenting how each generation of Americans has
witnessed struggles between order and liberty.
Steger, Manfred B. Judging Nonviolence: The Dispute Between Realists and Ideal-
ists. New York: Routledge, 2003. Balanced treatment of the arguments for
and against nonviolence, written in the aftermath of the September 11,
2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, with discussions of major social
political movements that employed nonviolence.
White, Jonathan R. Defending the Homeland: Domestic Intelligence Law Enforce-
ment and Security. Stamford, Conn.: Wadsworth, 2003. Survey of law en-
forcement in the United States discussing how the criminal justice system
has changed since September 11, 2001.
See also Arab American stereotypes; Arab immigrants; Border Patrol,

U.S.; Coast Guard, U.S.; Deportation; Illegal aliens; Immigration and Natu-
ralization Service; Muslims.
Settlement house
movement
The Event: Rise of charitable settlement houses in major urban centers
Date: 1890’s-early twentieth century
Significance: The settlement house movement provided social services and

cultural programs to immigrant and poor urban women and their families
and professional opportunities to college-educated women who desired to
work on behalf of social reform.
The settlement house movement began among Christian Socialists and

university-affiliated reformers in England and spread to major cities in North
America during the 1890’s. The houses, which were established primarily in
643
the urban centers of the Midwest and Northeast, multiplied from six in 1891
to more than four hundred in 1910. They became principal agencies of social
reform during the Progressive era.
Philosophy and Ideals A reaction to growing urbanization, immigra-

tion, and changes in labor patterns, settlement houses emphasized social ac-
tion to improve impoverished living conditions and exploitative labor prac-
tices. Influenced by the Social Gospel movement, they emphasized character
building and an organic vision of society based on cultural mediation and
mutual reciprocity between native-born citizens and immigrants and between
the middle class and the poor. They simultaneously advocated social assimila-
tion to middle-class norms and cultural pluralism or diversity. These positions
often came into conflict. The original settlement houses were also experi-
ments in collective living. Located in poor ethnic neighborhoods, they at-
tracted resident workers who were mainly young, idealistic, college-educated
men and women from well-to-do households.
Programs and Services Early programs focused on providing services

for children, including day care nurseries for the children of working moth-
ers, kindergartens, boys’ and girls’ clubs, recreation programs, nature out-
ings, playgrounds, and gymnasiums. Citizenship classes, emphasizing literacy
and the English language, were held for adults, as well as practical training
Cooking class in Chicago’s Hull-House. (University of Illinois at Chicago, University Library, Jane
Addams Memorial Collection)
644
courses in home economics, dressmaking, cooking, sanitation, and nutrition.

Medical and nursing services were provided by some houses, most notably by
the extensive visiting nurse service of the Henry Street Settlement House in
New York. Family counseling and job referral bureaus were offered to work-
ing women. Exhibitions, art history, and the performing arts, including mu-
sic and drama, also played an important part in settlement house program-
ming. Resident workers and teachers such as Ellen Gates Starr of Hull-House
believed in the uplifting value of fine art appreciation.
Efforts were made to attract Italian, Greek, and East European women to
the houses by appealing to nationalist loyalties, including the planning of
ethnic festivals, receptions, and celebrations of folk dancing and crafts. At
Hull-House, a labor museum was established in which immigrant women
demonstrated the history of textile arts. The museum program sought to
bridge cultural gaps that had developed between first-generation immi-
grants, who were highly skilled in handicrafts and traditional manufactures,
and their children, who were more familiar with factory work and mechaniza-
tion, many having lost respect for older ways.
Institutionalization and Reform Many of the programs that existed

on a trial basis in the settlement houses were adopted by public school sys-
tems, park and urban planning agencies, and the developing juvenile justice
system and social work institutions. In addition to providing services and
stimulating appreciation of diverse cultural heritages, settlement workers
were also in the forefront of the formation of social policy. They gathered
data to educate the population at large as to the needs of the urban poor, and
they lobbied for municipal reform and state and federal legislation that ad-
dressed the issues of housing, labor, women’s rights, and prostitution. Many
of the reforms that they advocated became central tenets of the Progressive
Party platform during Theodore Roosevelt’s presidential bid in 1912.
Ethnicity and Race While settlement workers saw themselves as advo-

cates for the lower classes, their application of middle-class values was some-
times at odds with immigrant women’s perspectives. Conflicts existed, for
example, over economic issues involved in child labor. While settlement
workers sought to abolish the practice, many immigrant families relied on the
income that children earned. Settlement workers also stressed white slavery
aspects of prostitution, portraying the prostitute as a victim and emphasizing
the sexual double standard and the curbing of male behavior while avoiding
the idea of sex work as a chosen occupation.
Few immigrant women ascended to positions of leadership in the protec-
tive leagues that emerged from the houses or in the resident work itself.
While most settlements were run by native-born whites on behalf of white eth-
nic immigrants, some offered separate branches for black residents, and a
few, such as the Phillis Wheatley Settlement in Minneapolis, were founded
specifically as residence facilities for African Americans.
645
Women’s Opportunities and the Legacy of Reform Although settle-

ment houses served both men and women, women such as Lillian Wald of the
Henry Street Settlement House and Jane Addams of Hull-House were among
the earliest founders of houses and the most prominent leaders of the move-
ment. The settlement houses in general provided outlets of usefulness for ed-
ucated women, aid to working women with families, and models of effective
female leadership, networking, and authority.
Many women who initially were involved in settlement work went on to po-
sitions of influence in organizations, unions, and government agencies,
broadening the impact of the settlement houses on the wider sphere of re-
form. Florence Kelley went from settlement experience to founding the Na-
tional Consumers’ League in 1899, which worked to improve labor condi-
tions for women and children. Julia Lathrop and Grace Abbott both became
directors of the Children’s Bureau. Alice Hamilton became a leading expert
on industrial medicine and a professor at Harvard Medical School. The Na-
tional Women’s Trade Union League (NWTUL), a labor organization, and
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP),
a civil rights group, were formed with support from settlement workers.
Alice Gannett of the Henry Street Settlement House led the lobbying ef-
forts that resulted in the passage of the Mothers’ Aid Law of 1913, which pro-
vided pensions to needy mothers of dependent children, and Sophonisba
Breckinridge and Edith Abbott were leaders in the new field of social work.
Both Addams and Wald became central figures in the war-era pacifist move-
ment, with Addams chair of the Women’s Peace Party and head of the
Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), and Wald
president of the American Union Against Militarism.
The settlement house movement bridged the gap between older Victorian
concepts of charity and philanthropy and modern social work. Over time, the
unique nature of the houses was eclipsed by the professionalization of social
services, which changed the cooperative volunteer staffing of the settlements
to salaried and specialized positions. Post-World War I conservatism and
changes in fund-raising methods also diminished the operations of the
houses.
Barbara Bair
Further Reading
Addams, Jane. Twenty Years at Hull House. Edited by Victoria Bissell Brown.
Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999. Scholarly edition, with additional au-
tobiographical materials, of a book that Addams first published in 1911.
Provides detailed account of the establishment, operation, and philosophy
of Hull-House.
Bryan, Mary Linn McCree, and Allen Davis. One Hundred Years at Hull-House.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990. Compendium of primary
sources about Hull-House, including numerous photographs.
646
Sikh immigrants
Carson, Mina. Settlement Folk: Social Thought and the American Settlement Move-
ment, 1885-1930. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. An exten-
sively documented examination of the contribution of U.S. settlement-
house workers to the development of social welfare. Provides a historical
and ideological context for the work of Hull-House.
Davis, Allen. Spearheads for Reform: The Social Settlements and the Progressive Move-
ment, 1890-1914. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967. An overview of
the origin, guiding principles, activities, and accomplishments of Ameri-
can social settlements during their early years.
Deegan, Mary Jo. Race, Hull-House, and the University of Chicago: A New Con-
science Against Ancient Evils. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2002. Study of Hull-
House, from 1892 to 1960, in the context of racial and ethnic issues.
Glowacki, Peggy, and Julia Hendry. Hull-House. Charleston, S.C.: Arcadia,
2004. Study of Hull-House, from 1892 to 1960, in the context of racial and
ethnic issues.
Levine, Daniel. Jane Addams and the Liberal Tradition. Westport, Conn.: Green-
wood Press, 1980. A useful discussion of the background, context, daily op-
erations, institutional growth, and community influence of Hull-House.
Shpak Lissak, Rivka. Pluralism and Progressives: Hull House and the New Immi-
grants, 1890-1919. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989. Scholarly
study of settlement houses that focuses on the services they provided to
new immigrants.
See also Hull-House; Machine politics; Women immigrants.
Sikh immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from a religious community
whose origins are in South Asia’s Punjab region
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Demographics; Religion
Significance: The numbers of Sikhs in the United States have never been
large, but after the relaxation of restrictions on immigration from Asia
during the 1960’s, highly educated and affluent Sikhs settled in every ma-
jor American city.
The founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak Dev (1469-1539), advocated peace, a

casteless society, the oneness of God, and the unifying of Hindus and Mus-
lims. Vicious persecution contributed to this peaceful community being
transformed into the Khalsa, a soldier-saint brotherhood who believed it was
right to draw the sword for a just cause.
647
Sikh immigrants
The Sikhs’ tenth and last Guru,

Gobind Singh (1666-1708), insti-
tuted the 5Ks, a term used for the
symbols Sikhs wear, uncut hair un-
der a turban being the most no-
ticeable. Throughout their history,
Sikhs have been respected for their
martial valor, innovativeness, adapt-
ability to diverse situations, and
Image Not Available migratory tradition. Sikh commu-
nities are found throughout the
world.
The initial influx, from 1904 to
1923, consisted primarily of Sikhs
who originated in rural Punjab and
had agricultural backgrounds but
were residing in Canada. They mi-
grated south to escape being tar-
gets of violence. Some obtained
employment in the lumber trade
around Bellingham and Everett,
Washington. In 1907, about one
thousand Sikhs were expelled from the Pacific Northwest because local labor-
ers believed they were depressing wages. The Sikhs and other Indians moved
south to work on the farms in the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Imperial Val-
leys in the summer and labored in the California cities of Yuba City, Stockton,
and El Centro in the winter. Their numbers probably never exceeded six
thousand. Contemporary newspaper articles talked about the “Hindoo inva-
sion” and “turbaned tide.”
In 1918, the “Hindoo” conspiracy trials brought adverse publicity to the
Sikh and Indian community of California. In 1913, the Ghadr (revolution-
ary) Party was formed and headquartered in San Francisco with the aim of
gaining India’s independence from Great Britain. The defendants in the
Hindoo case, active members of the Ghadr Party, were charged with violating
U.S. neutrality laws. Much of the evidence and impetus to prosecute came
from British agents.
In 1923, immigration from India to the United States was effectively halted;
legislation prevented South Asians from owning land, becoming citizens, or
bringing spouses to the United States. As a result, some Sikhs married Mexi-
can women. The Ghadr Party remained active, but at a reduced level. During
the 1930’s, many Sikhs returned to India, and the population decreased to
less than fifteen hundred. In 1946, the Luce-Celler Bill was passed, giving
people of Asian Indian descent the right to become American citizens and
creating an immigration quota for India.
In 1965, immigration legislation ended the national origins quotas. Immi-
648
Southeast Asian immigrants
gration to the United States was based on the candidate’s ability to meet a set
of qualifications. In India, a cadre of highly educated doctors, engineers, and
scientists was ready to take advantage of the new laws. The Sikhs who immi-
grated under the relaxed laws are residentially dispersed in affluent suburbs.
They gather in their local gurdwaras, or Sikh places of worship, which are part
of the landscape of every major city in North America.
Arthur W. Helweg
Further Reading
Helweg, Arthur W., and Usha M. Helweg. An Immigrant Success Story: East Indi-
ans in the United States. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,
1990.
La Brack, Bruce. The Sikhs of Northern California, 1904-1974. New York: AMS
Press, 1988.
Motwani, Jagat K. America and India in a “Give and Take” Relationship: Socio-
psychology of Asian Indian Immigrants. New York: Center for Asian, African
and Caribbean Studies, 2003.
See also Asian Indian immigrants; Asian Indian immigrants and family
customs; Twice migrants.
Southeast Asian
immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Southeast Asian na-
tions of Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam

riage; Refugees
Significance: There are substantial Southeast Asian populations through-

out North America, each with distinctive family customs.
Since 1975 large numbers of Southeast Asians from Laos, Cambodia, Thai-
land, and Vietnam have settled throughout the United States and southern
Canada. Most of those from Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam arrived in North
649
America as refugees after socialist governments came to power in those coun-

tries at the end of the Vietnam War. The Hmong, a minority group from the
mountains of Laos, were among these refugees. The Thais arrived in North
America as immigrants, not refugees, with the largest numbers entering as
students or as spouses of U.S. or Canadian citizens. However, much of the
Thai settlement is also a consequence of American involvement in the war in
Southeast Asia from 1965 to 1975, because Thailand borders Cambodia and
Laos and the war established many links between America and Thailand.
California holds the largest concentrations of Southeast Asians in North
America. Of the 149,014 Laotians in the 1990 U.S. Census, 58,058, or 39 per-
cent, lived in California. Similarly, California was home to 32,064, or 35 per-
cent, of the 91,275 U.S. Thais; 68,190, or 46 percent, of the 147,411 U.S. Cam-
bodians; 46,892, or 52 percent, of the 90,082 U.S. Hmong; and 280,223, or 46
percent, of the 614,547 U.S. Vietnamese. Canada has a relatively small Thai
population, found chiefly in Toronto, but by the late 1980’s it was home to
more than 100,000 Southeast Asians from the other groups. About three-
quarters of Canadian Southeast Asians are Vietnamese, and they are primar-
ily concentrated in Ontario Province, particularly in Toronto.
Size and Youth of Families The Southeast Asians come from countries in
which large families are customary and, as a consequence, their families tend
to be much larger than those of other Americans. In the United States, for ex-
ample, U.S. Census data show that the average American family had only 3.16
people per family. The average Canadian family was slightly larger. The aver-
age Cambodian family, by contrast, had 5.03 people, the average Laotian fam-
ily 5.01, the average Vietnamese family 4.36, and the average Hmong family
6.58. Only the Thais, with an average family size of 3.48 people were close to
other Americans. This is probably a reflection of the fact that so many Thais
came to the United States as students or were married to non-Asian Ameri-
cans.
Partly as a result of large family size, Southeast Asians tend to be younger
than other Americans. In 1990 about one-fourth of all Americans were youn-
ger than eighteen. That same year nearly half of all Cambodian Americans
and Laotian Americans were younger than eighteen. More than one-third of
Vietnamese Americans and nearly two-thirds of Hmong Americans were
younger than eighteen. Only the Thais were similar to other Americans. The
extreme youth of the refugee groups means that passing on traditional family
customs and relations is an especially large task for Laotian, Cambodian,
Hmong, and Vietnamese parents.
Family Relations Husbands are regarded as the heads of families among

all Southeast Asian groups, but women often wield much power, especially
over matters having to do with the household. Children in traditional South-
east Asian families are expected to show a great deal of respect for elders.
Older brothers and sisters are expected to take responsibility for younger sib-
650
lings, and younger children are expected to defer to their older siblings. The
psychologist Nathan Caplan has argued that highly cooperative family rela-
tions may be one of the reasons why Southeast Asian children often do well in
American schools, since brothers and sisters frequently help one another in
doing schoolwork.
Since women are regarded as the core of the family and the central carriers
of tradition in all Southeast Asian cultures, parents tend to place higher ex-
pectations and restrictions on daughters than on sons. This sometimes causes
resentment on the part of American-born daughters and may lead to friction
within families. Both sons and daughters sometimes come into conflict with
parents when the children attempt to live out American values of individual
independence.
Marriage and Wedding Customs The wedding customs of Thais, Lao-

tians, and Cambodians are quite similar. In common traditional Thai and
Laotian weddings, bridegrooms visit brides’ houses on the evening before the
wedding. Buddhist monks bless elaborate begging bowls filled with water.
Then a long strand of cotton thread is tied around couples’ and monks’ wrists
and looped around the blessed water. This ceremony is intended to unite the
souls (known in both Lao and Thai as kwan) of the betrothed.
The next morning, monks, friends, and relatives sprinkle couples with the
consecrated water. Later in the day, brides and bridegrooms sit together,
dressed in traditional clothing, in front of a feast and wedding gifts in the
presence of their families and guests. The monks recite prayers for couples’
happiness and well-being.
In Cambodian weddings the ceremony usually begins in the morning at
the brides’ homes, where Buddhist monks chant blessings. Locks of hair are
cut from the heads of the betrothed. Cotton threads soaked in holy water are
tied around the wrists of brides and bridegrooms. A circle of married couples
then passes around a candle in order to bless the marriages. Such weddings
are followed by a large feast, which may be held in a private home or in a res-
taurant, depending on the convenience and means of the families.
Among the Hmong, marriages are traditionally arranged by go-betweens,
who negotiate a price to be paid to the brides’ families. Marriages are made
public by a two-day feast. In Laos, if families could not agree on a bride-price
or if prospective husbands were unacceptable to brides’ families, suitors
would often elope with the young women or kidnap them. Because the
Hmong in America who have tried in some instances to follow this practice
have been charged with kidnapping and rape, this custom has become very
rare.
Wedding customs of Vietnamese Americans are quite different from those
of other Southeast Asians, because the Vietnamese have been much more in-
fluenced by Chinese civilization than other Southeast Asians and many Viet-
namese are Roman Catholics. Although Roman Catholic and Buddhist Viet-
namese maintain many social ties with one another, marriages of people of
651
different religious faiths are fairly rare. Roman Catholic and Buddhist Viet-
namese in North America often live in separate communities. Although wed-
ding customs differ among Vietnamese of different religions, wedding feasts
following marriage ceremonies are a central tradition for all.
Family Holiday Celebrations Holiday celebrations are important to

Southeast Asian American families, because they provide opportunities for
elders to pass on traditions and customs to younger people. Among all
groups, New Year’s celebrations are the most widely held and most important.
The Laotian, Cambodian, and Thai New Year is usually held in mid-April.
Thais and Laotians in America frequently dress in traditional clothes and
hold cultural exhibitions during New Year’s events, and they enjoy the cus-
tom of throwing water on each other. The Cambodians hold parties and
dances and sometimes play a customary game in which young men and
women throw a rolled-up scarf back and forth. At the Hmong New Year’s Fes-
tival, held at the time of the new moon in December, young men and women
play a similar courting game, tossing a ball back and forth. The Vietnamese
New Year, held in January or February, is a lively three-day celebration with a
variety of family and community rituals.
Further Reading
Barr, Linda. Long Road to Freedom: Journey of the Hmong. Bloomington, Minn.:
Red Brick Learning, 2004.
Caplan, Nathan, John K. Whitmore, and Marcella H. Choy. The Boat People and
Achievement in America: A Study of Family Life, and Cultural Values. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 1989.
Cargill, Mary Terrell, and Jade Quang Huynh, eds. Voices of Vietnamese Boat
People: Nineteen Narratives of Escape and Survival. Jefferson, N.C.: McFar-
land, 2000.
Chan, Sucheng. Survivors: Cambodian Refugees in the United States. Urbana: Uni-
versity of Illinois Press, 2004.
_______, ed. Hmong Means Free: Life in Laos and America. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1994.
Mote, Sue Murphy. Hmong and American: Stories of Transition to a Strange Land.
Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2004.
endish, 1995.
Proudfoot, Robert. Even the Birds Don’t Sound the Same Here: The Laotian Ref-
ugees’ Search for Heart in American Culture. New York: Peter Lang, 1990.
652
Soviet Jewish immigrants
Tenhula, John. Voices from Southeast Asia: The Refugee Experience in the United
States. New York: Holmes & Meier, 1991.
Zhou, Min, and Carl L. Bankston III. Growing Up American: The Adaptation of
Vietnamese Children to American Society. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
1998.
See also Asian American education; Asian American literature; Asian

American stereotypes; Asian American women; Farmworkers’ union; Filipino
immigrants; Hmong immigrants; Model minorities; Nguyen v. Immigration and
Naturalization Service; Refugees and racial/ethnic relations; Vietnamese im-
migrants.

Identification: Jewish immigrants to North America who emigrated from
the Soviet Union before its breakup during the early 1990’s

grants; Refugees
Significance: After suffering through a long history of oppression under the

Russian czars and Soviet rulers, Jews living in the Soviet Union pressed for
the right to emigrate. Many who were allowed to leave came to the United
States, where they found it difficult to assimilate with other Jews.
When the Bolsheviks assumed power in Russia in 1917, they promised to end
the periodic pogroms (massacres) and frequent discrimination that Russian
Jews had experienced under the czars. However, the Soviet government soon
engaged in widespread, though perhaps less overt, forms of discrimination
and persecution against the country’s Jewish population. In addition, be-
cause the Soviet Union’s official communist ideology included a commit-
ment to atheism, Jews, along with other religious groups, were essentially
barred from practicing their religion. Houses of worship were closed or de-
stroyed, and religious leaders were imprisoned.
During the era of détente during the 1970’s, the Soviet government per-
mitted a significant increase in Jewish emigration. This was partly caused by
the passage in the U.S. Congress of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which tied
American-Soviet trade to an increase in the Soviet Union’s Jewish emigration
permits. Although many Soviet Jews emigrated to Israel, a large portion of
these emigrants eventually settled in the United States. Jewish American
groups had lobbied the federal government both to pressure the Soviet gov-
ernment to release Jews and to permit more Soviet Jews to settle in the United
States.
653
Although the immigration cam-

paign was highly successful, Soviet
Jewish immigrants did not always
integrate with the American Jewish
community as well as had been
hoped. The immigrants were fre-
quently more secular, having grown
up in an officially atheistic state.
They also tended to be poor and
eager to make use of resources
made available by American Jewish
groups. Politically, many Soviet Jew-
ish immigrants were more conser-
vative than the mainstream Ameri-
can Jewish groups. Also, many of
the immigrants did not speak En-
glish. A number of American Jewish
leaders expressed disappointment
about their inability to incorporate Many refugees from the Soviet Union who could
and assimilate the new immigrants. not obtain Soviet passports, traveled under League
A second wave of Soviet Jewish of Nations passports such as this one, which was
emigration took place during the issued shortly after Joseph Stalin took power in
late 1980’s and early 1990’s, when the Soviet Union. (Library of Congress)
Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev
liberalized his country’s emigration laws. The collapse of the Soviet Union in
1991 in particular created a renewed impetus for Soviet Jews (and others) to
leave their country. Many Soviet Jews were attracted to the United States by
concerted campaigns by Jewish American groups. The number of Jewish im-
migrants from the former Soviet Union increased from about 200 in 1986 to a
peak of 185,000 in 1990. A total of more than 700,000 Soviet Jews immigrated
to the United States between 1987 and 1997.
The fact that many Soviet Jewish immigrants do not look, speak, or behave
like mainstream American Jews has underscored an important principle of
racial and ethnic relations. Frequently, cultural and societal differences—
rather than purely racial, ethnic, or religious differences—have led to fric-
tion between groups. Similarly, the mere sharing of ethnic or racial back-
grounds does not ensure intergroup harmony.
Steve D. Boilard
Further Reading
Altshuler, Stuart. The Exodus of the Soviet Jews. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &
Littlefield, 2005.
Shasha, Dennis Elliott, and Marina Shron. Red Blues: Voices from the Last Wave of
Russian Immigrants. New York: Holmes & Meier, 2002.
654
Taiwanese immigrants
Wertsman, Vladimir, ed. The Russians in America: A Chronology and Fact Book.
Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publications, 1977.
immigrants; Jewish settlement of New York; Jews and Arab Americans; Justice
and immigration; Mail-order brides; Russian immigrants; Sephardic Jews.
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the East Asian island na-
tion of Taiwan, which is also known as Nationalist China
Significance: Because of Taiwan’s special relationship with mainland China,

the large number of Taiwanese immigrants in the United States have
played an important role in relations among Taiwan, China, and the
United States.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 brought a surge of Asian immi-
gration to the United States. From 1965 to 1980, many Taiwanese who came
to the United States as graduate students decided to remain as immigrants be-
cause the economic opportunities were better in America than in Taiwan.
Many of these immigrants settled in ethnic communities such as Flushing and
Queens in New York and Monterey Park in California. The Taiwanese immi-
grants felt comfortable in these communities because within them they could
speak their native language and interact with other Taiwanese immigrants.
In 1981, when Congress set a yearly quota of twenty thousand Taiwanese
immigrants, the characteristics of those arriving changed. The new immi-
grants typically had not studied in the United States and were less likely to
speak English. The concentration of non-English-speaking immigrants in
certain areas such as Monterey Park caused a backlash, spawning efforts to
have English declared the official language in states such as California during
the mid- and late-1980’s.
By the end of the twentieth century, more than 250,000 Taiwanese Ameri-
cans lived in the United States. Of this group, 20 percent were born in the
United States and 40 percent were naturalized citizens. The median age of
this group was about thirty-five, and with a college graduation rate of 60 per-
cent, a member of this group was much more likely to have completed higher
education than was the average American. Eight percent of this group held
doctoral degrees, and 48 percent were employed in managerial or profes-
655
sional positions. Taiwanese Ameri-

cans tended to be very prosperous,
with average incomes higher than the
national median; 71 percent of them
owned their own homes.
Throughout the history of Taiwan-
ese immigration, organizations de-
voted to the social, economic, and
political welfare of Taiwanese Ameri-
cans have existed across the United
States. Part of their social and cul-
tural purpose has been to maintain
Taiwanese cultural traditions among
the immigrants and their descendants
and to familiarize other Americans
with those traditions. Therefore, many
Taiwanese American organizations
have introduced their communities
to such cultural practices as eating
Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975) established the moon cakes to celebrate the autumn
Republic of China on the island of Taiwan in festival, celebrating the Lunar New
1949, after Mao Zedong’s Communist Party Year, and preparing rice dumplings
took control of the mainland and created the
for the Dragonboat Festival.
People’s Republic of China. Taiwan had a close
Taiwanese American organizations
relationship with the United States through the
Cold War, until the 1970’s, when the United have also attempted to exert political
States recognized the People’s Republic. The influence in both the United States
question of Taiwan’s independence from China and Taiwan. In the United States, they
remained unresolved into the twenty-first cen- have attempted to affect U.S. foreign
tury. (Library of Congress) policy toward China and Taiwan. They
have organized demonstrations to pro-
test overseas incidents that have affected Taiwan and have lobbied members
of Congress to support Taiwan’s efforts to remain free of China. Through po-
litical activities designed to affect their homeland, Taiwanese Americans have
helped to create a more democratic Taiwan by helping to elect prodemocracy
members to the Kuomintang (parliament) and by supporting the prodemoc-
racy candidate during the 1996 presidential elections.
Annita Marie Ward
Further Reading
Chee, Maria W. L. Taiwanese American Transnational Families: Women and Kin
Work. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Chen, Hsiang-Shui. Chinatown No More: Taiwan Immigrants in Contemporary
New York. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992.
endish, 1995.
656
Thai garment worker enslavement
Pyong Gap Min. Asian Americans. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications,
1995.
See also Amerasians; Asian American education; Chinatowns; Chinese

American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclusion cases;
Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold rush; Chi-
nese immigrants and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coolies; Immi-
gration Act of 1943.
Thai garment worker

enslavement
The Event: Southern California garment factory that employed seventy-two
Thai immigrants in slavelike conditions until raided by Immigration and
Naturalization Service officers
Date: August 2, 1995
Place: El Monte, California
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Labor; Slavery
Significance: This highly publicized incident helped to call attention to how

the largely hidden problem of slavery in the modern world reaches even
into industrialized democracies such as the United States.
Before dawn on August 2, 1995, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service

(INS) officials staged a raid on a garment factory in El Monte, California. The
factory, surrounded by barbed wire, held seventy-two workers from Thailand,
some of whom had lived and worked in the factory for years. When the work-
ers first arrived in the United States, their employers took them from the air-
port directly to the factory. Each night, the workers, who sewed clothing that
was sold under major brand names, were locked up and guarded. They
worked from 7:00 a.m. to midnight every day, for $1.60 per hour, with no ex-
tra pay for working more than forty hours a week. Most of this pay was with-
held by their employers as repayment for transportation costs to the United
States. Factory owners often held children of the workers hostage to force the
adults to keep working. The employers also threatened to beat workers who
tried to escape.
Captives Neighbors thought that the high walls and barbed wire sur-
rounding the El Monte factory had been put in place to keep criminals out,
657
Thai garment worker enslavement
not to keep workers in. Immigration officers had been suspicious for a long
time, however, and in 1992, the INS had sought a warrant to search the build-
ing. On that first occasion, federal prosecutors refused to grant the warrant,
saying that the evidence of wrongdoing was not sufficient.
By the time INS officers gained legal permission to stage their raid on the
factory, some of the workers had been imprisoned for as long as seven years.
The operation began during the late 1980’s when the Manasurangkun broth-
ers from Thailand, Wirachai, Phanasak, and Surachai, together with their
mother, Suni, joined with three other Thai people to recruit poor women in
their native land. By bringing these women to the United States, the Manasur-
angkuns and their partners could get inexpensive labor to sew clothing for
name-brand manufacturers. Over time, the treatment of the workers grew in-
creasingly harsh, and the Manasurangkuns hired guards to keep them from
escaping. According to Rojana Cheunchujit, a worker who spoke English and
came to serve as a spokesperson for the others, the Thai women had to work
sixteen hours a day and sleep on a dirty floor with cockroaches and mice. Two
women who tried to escape were beaten and sent back to Thailand.
Consequences The case of the Thai workers in El Monte helped call atten-
tion to the plight of garment workers in the United States. Since the 1960’s,
the sewing of clothing has moved away from large factories and toward small
producers who supply large retail stores with a variety of clothes designed to
appeal to consumers with varied tastes. These large retail stores are relatively
few in number and control much of the American market. To make profits,
clothing manufacturers have had to keep their costs down because the retail
stores want to supply customers with inexpensive clothes. The clothing manu-
facturers compete with each other to make garments as cheaply as possible,
and the manufacturers therefore try to find the cheapest workers they can.
Because immigrants, especially those in the country illegally, will work for
lower wages than other people in the United States, by the 1990’s, a majority
of garment workers were immigrant women.
The slavelike conditions found at the El Monte factory are rare in the
United States. Nevertheless, many garment workers labor in difficult and of-
ten illegal circumstances. For example, a 1994 investigation by California la-
bor officials looked into the operations of sixty-nine randomly selected man-
ufacturers. All but two of these manufacturers were found to be breaking
federal or state laws or both. Half of them were violating minimum wage laws,
68 percent were violating laws regarding overtime, and 93 percent were vio-
lating health and safety regulations.
The publicity created by the raid at El Monte led to an investigation of the
clothing industry by the U.S. Labor Department within two weeks after the in-
cident. The Labor Department warned more than a dozen of the largest U.S.
retail merchants that they may have received goods made by the Thai work-
ers. Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich called a meeting with the retailers to dis-
cuss ways to avoid selling goods made by enslaved workers.
658
Tibetan immigrants
Within two weeks of the raid, the California Labor Department demanded
business records from sixteen garment makers believed to have had connec-
tions with the El Monte factory. California labor commissioner Virginia Brad-
shaw found that many of the manufacturers who did business with the El
Monte factory were themselves engaging in illegal activities, and the Califor-
nia Labor Department fined several of them $35,000 each for failing to regis-
ter their operations with the state.
In late September, 1999, the California State Assembly passed Assembly
Bill 633, a law designed to crack down on clothing sweatshops, businesses em-
ploying workers to make clothes under unfair and illegal conditions. Cheun-
chujit testified before the assembly when it was considering the law.
The workers also sued the companies that hired the El Monte factory to
make clothes. In July, 1999, their attorneys agreed with these companies that
the workers would be paid $1.2 million for back wages and damages. Under
the agreement, the workers would receive $10,000 to $80,000 each, depend-
ing on how many years they had been forced to work in the factory. The
Manasurangkuns pleaded guilty to charges of smuggling the workers into the
United States and keeping them in slavelike conditions. The four family
members and three other Thai people who worked with them were sentenced
to prison terms.
Further Reading
Bales, Kevin. New Slavery: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-
Clio, 2001.
Bush, M. L. Servitude in Modern Times. Cambridge, England: Polity Press, 2000.
Miers, Suzanne. Slavery in the Twentieth Century: The Evolution of a Global Prob-
lem. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
See also Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance; Clotilde slave ship; Eastern
European Jewish immigrants; Garment industry; Southeast Asian immi-
grants; Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire; Women immigrants.
Tibetan immigrants
Identification: Immigrants to North America from the Tibetan region of
China
Significance: Though nominally Chinese citizens, Tibetans are members of

a distinct ethnic group whose homeland was once autonomous from
China. A small number of Tibetan refugees live in the United States.
659
Tibetan immigrants
In May, 1951, one year after Chinese troops had occupied Tibet, the govern-
ments of Tibet and China agreed that China’s government would have con-
trol of Tibet and that the Dalai Lama would be the political leader of Tibet
while the Panchen Lama would be the spiritual leader. In 1959, after an upris-
ing in Tibet, the Dalai Lama and about 100,000 of his followers left Tibet to
live in India. The Panchen Lama remained in China, but in 1964, he was re-
moved from power by the Chinese government. The next year, Tibet was
made an autonomous region of China, and, by 1966, the Chinese govern-
ment had control of Tibetan newspapers, radio, and television. The Chinese
refused to accept the Panchen Lama’s successor, chosen by the Dalai Lama
and the Tibetan priesthood, and substituted their own candidate for the posi-
tion.
During the 1990’s, a small number of the Dalai Lama’s followers moved to
the United States, and by 1999, Tibetans were living in thirty-four states.
These Tibetans brought the situation in their homeland to the attention of
Americans in the hope that the United States would use its political influence
to get the Chinese to recognize the autonomy of Tibet and the authority of
the Dalai Lama and the members of the Lama priesthood.
Throughout the United States, various groups such as the Students for a
Free Tibet worked to make Americans aware of Tibetan culture and of its
problems, presenting statistics on the numbers of Tibetans believed to have
been killed by the Chinese and the number of monasteries that were reput-
edly destroyed. These Tibetans claimed that China had denied them freedom
of religion by not allowing Tibetans to choose their own successor to the
Panchen Lama or even to hang pictures of the Dalai Lama. As evidence of hu-
man rights violations, they related an incident involving Ngavong Choephel,
who, in July, 1995, after going to Tibet as a Fulbright scholar to make a film on
Tibetan arts, was arrested by the Chinese, charged with being a U.S. spy, and
sentenced to eighteen years in prison. These groups noted that self-determi-
nation, a universal right named in the United Nations Declaration of Human
Rights, was not available to Tibetans.
In 1997, the American Episcopal Church passed a resolution urging talks
between China and the Dalai Lama. July 6, the birthday of the Dalai Lama,
was recognized as World Tibet Day with an interfaith call for freedom of wor-
ship for Tibetans. Festivals were held across the United States; popular rock
groups such as Pearl Jam participated in a concert in Washington, D.C., in
support of negotiations for a free Tibet. President Bill Clinton and Vice Presi-
dent Al Gore met with the Dalai Lama, and in 1997, Clinton announced the
creation of a post for Tibetan Affairs in the State Department. The Tibetan
campaign to raise American awareness had become so successful that many
Americans plastered “Free Tibet” stickers on their automobile bumpers in
support of the cause.
Two pro-Tibetan movies were released by Hollywood in 1997, Seven Years in
Tibet, starring Brad Pitt, and Kundun, a biography of the Dalai Lama, directed
by Martin Scorsese. Kundun was released even though the Chinese govern-
660
Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire
ment threatened economic reprisals against the Disney Company, which was
responsible for the film. Both movies heightened Americans’ sympathies to-
ward Tibet. During the opening week of Seven Years in Tibet, the International
Campaign for Tibet handed out 150,000 action kits, explaining how movie-
goers could help free Tibet.
Annita Marie Ward
Further Reading
Bernstorff, Dagmar, and Hubertus von Welck, eds. Exile as Challenge: The Ti-
betan Diaspora. Rev. Eng. ed. Hyderabad, India: Orient Longman, 2003.
endish, 1995.
Powers, John. History as Propaganda: Tibetan Exiles Versus the People’s Republic of
China. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Pyong Gap Min. Asian Americans. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications,
1995.
See also Asian American stereotypes; Chinese immigrants; Immigration

and Nationality Act of 1952; Twice migrants.
Triangle Shirtwaist
Company fire
The Event: Lethal fire in a garment sweatshop employing mostly immigrant
labor
Immigration issue: Labor
Significance: This tragic accident that killed 146 people, most of them im-
migrant women, led to tougher laws in New York State to protect women
and spurred union organizing among women.
On March 25, 1911, a deadly fire broke out in the building that housed the
Triangle Shirtwaist Company, located in the Greenwich Village district of
New York City. The entire structure was soon consumed by flames. The firm
was a notorious sweatshop where a predominantly female force of immigrant
workers turned out cheap clothing in wretched, unsanitary, and unsafe con-
ditions. Such establishments were common in the garment district of New
661
York at the beginning of the twentieth century, a time when poor women had
to take work where they could find it. As the fire spread from the discarded
rags where it had started, the trapped workers sought to escape by jumping
out of windows to the pavement; they fell ten stories to their deaths. Others
died inside from the effects of the smoke. Those who sought to flee found
that exit doors did not open or that faulty fire escapes blocked their route.
The death toll reached 146, most of them women. Dramatic pictures filled
the New York newspapers the next day, depicting the horrors of the scene.
The fire became one of the worst fatal accidents in the history of American in-
dustrialism.
Protests about the unsafe conditions followed. A rally was organized by the
National Women’s Trade Union League (NWTUL) and drew eighty thou-
sand marchers. An outraged public became even more incensed when a jury
acquitted the building’s owners of wrongdoing. The popular outcry against
sweatshops accelerated the campaign of the NWTUL and the International
Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU) to reform the system in New York
City that kept many women in economic serfdom to the clothing trade. The
ILGWU, led by Rose Schneiderman and other female activists, joined with
middle-class reformers in demands for a state investigating commission to
probe the causes of the blaze and to recommend laws to prevent future fires
in the garment district.
Several days after the Triangle Shirtwaist Company disaster, a procession was held to commemo-
rate the victims of the fire. (Library of Congress)
662
The New York State Factory Investigating Commission made its report in
1914 and advocated sweeping changes in health and safety regulations. At
first, the New York legislature resisted an effort to implement the commis-
sion’s findings, but leading Democrats, including state senator Robert F. Wag-
ner and future governor Alfred E. Smith, pressed for and secured passage of
tougher laws against sweatshops. The Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire be-
came a landmark episode in the effort to improve working conditions for all
American women and to safeguard them against the devastating effects of in-
dustrial accidents. It represented a turning point in the struggle for decent
treatment of women in the workplace during the era of progressive reform
from 1900 to 1920 in the United States.
Lewis L. Gould
Further Reading
Crute, Sheree. “The Insurance Scandal Behind the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire.”
Ms. 11 (April, 1983): 81-83. Discusses the profits made from the fire by the
factory owners. Includes an interview with Pauline Newman, a labor union
activist who began working at the Triangle Shirtwaist Company when she
was ten years of age.
Ley, Sandra. Fashion for Everyone: The Story of Ready-to-Wear, 1870’s-1970’s. New
York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1975. A history of the women’s clothing in-
dustry in the United States, discussing designers, fashions of the times, la-
bor struggles, and methods of clothing production and distribution.
Mitelman, Bonnie. “Rose Schneiderman and the Triangle Fire.” American His-
tory Illustrated 16, no. 4 (July, 1981): 38-47. A profusely illustrated account
of the fire. Includes the text of a speech given days after the disaster by la-
bor union activist Rose Schneiderman, whose impassioned call for action
stirred many to demand reform legislation.
Naden, Corinne. The Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, March 25, 1911. New York: Frank-
lin Watts, 1971. A brief, simple summary of the fire, its causes, and its after-
math, with detailed maps of each floor of the Triangle Shirtwaist Company
on the day of the fire. Written for young readers, with numerous illustra-
tions.
Stein, Leon. The Triangle Fire. 1962. Reprint. New York: Carroll & Graf, 1985.
The definitive work on the subject, written on the fiftieth anniversary of
the fire. A detailed account drawn from court transcripts, official reports,
newspaper articles, and interviews with survivors, which meticulously re-
constructs the event through the eyes of the participants.
See also Garment industry; Thai garment worker enslavement; Women

immigrants.
663
Twice migrants
Twice migrants
Definition: People who emigrate to other countries more than once
Significance: Multiple migration is not a new phenomenon; however, it has

become more common among migrant workers from developing nations.
Migration is the physical movement of people within a social system. Sociolo-

gists have studied the subject through the examination of emigration and im-
migration—what pushes people to leave their homeland (emigrate) and
what pulls people to enter a new culture and country (immigrate). In the lat-
ter part of the twentieth century, more complex approaches to migration
have emerged as a result of the growing diasporic population of workers. For
example, international demands for labor and the shift of capital across na-
tional boundaries have increased the rate of multiple migration.
Scholar Parminder Bhachu examined a group of Asians of Sikh origin who
first migrated to East Africa and then to the United Kingdom. In Africa, this
group formed settled communities and shared past experiences as Asians of
Sikh origin; they also, however, developed a strong East African identity,
which was later reproduced in the United Kingdom. Thus, this Asian group
created ties in more than one nation or culture through multiple migration.
An increasing number of people migrate not just once or twice but even three
times to various countries.
Mary Yu Danico
Further Reading
Bhachu, Parminder. Twice Migrants: East African Sikh Settlers in Britain. New
York: Tavistock, 1985.
Reitz, Jeffrey G., ed. Host Societies and the Reception of Immigrants. La Jolla,
nia, San Diego, 2003.
See also Deportation; History of U.S. immigration; Immigration and Natu-

ralization Service v. Chadha; Israeli immigrants; Japanese Peruvians; Justice
and immigration; Push and pull factors; Sephardic Jews; Sikh immigrants; Ti-
betan immigrants.
664
Undocumented workers
Definition: Immigrants who enter the United States illegally—without proper
visas, passports, or other types of legal documentation, to obtain employ-
ment
Immigration issues: Border control; Economics; Illegal immigration; La-

tino immigrants; Law enforcement; Mexican immigrants
Significance: The term undocumented workers commonly applied to Mexi-

can and Central American workers in the United States. Undocumented
workers have formed the largest immigrant workforce since World War II.
Historically, undocumented workers were referred to as “wetbacks,” a refer-

ence to the notion that Mexican immigrants illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico
border by swimming the Rio Grande (known on the Mexican side of the bor-
der as the Río Bravo), which runs along part of the Texas border. Although
some illegal immigrants wade across the river, in reality few, if any, swim
across, since the river is seldom deep enough to necessitate swimming. Not
only was the term “wetback” an inaccurate descriptor for most individuals
who entered the country illegally; it soon came to have derogatory and dis-
Undocumented Mexican farmworkers waiting to be sent back to Mexico at Calexico in 1972, dur-
ing a period when an estimated 300,000 Mexicans were entering the United States illegally
every year in search of employment. (NARA)
665
criminatory connotations when it was applied to all Mexicans and even to

native-born U.S. citizens of Mexican or any other Latin American descent
who were living in the United States.
The term “undocumented worker” is less politically charged than “wet-
back” or “illegal alien” and is a much more accurate and neutral descriptor of
the individuals who come to the United States in search of work without legal
papers.
Celestino Fernández
Further Reading
Ahmed, Syed Refaat. Forlorn Migrants: An International Legal Regime for Undocu-
mented Migrant Workers. Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press, 2000. Inter-
national perspectives on undocumented workers by an Asian scholar.
controversial issues relating to immigration, including the regulation of
undocumented workers.
ered are government policy and undocumented workers.
tation.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Analysis of the economic impact of il-
legal immigration in the United States.
See also Florida illegal-immigrant suit; Haitian immigrants; History of

U.S. immigration; Illegal aliens; Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986; Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Naturalization;
Plyler v. Doe; Proposition 187; Proposition 227; Refugee fatigue; September 11
terrorist attacks.
666
Universal Negro Improvement Association
Universal Negro
Improvement Association
Identification: Early black nationalist organization
Immigration issues: African Americans; Civil rights and liberties
Significance: Founded by a Jamaican immigrant, the Universal Negro Im-

provement Association was an organization dedicated to supporting Afri-
can American racial pride and did much to advance the growth of black
nationalism during the 1920’s.
In March, 1916, a young black Jamaican, Marcus Mosiah Garvey, arrived in

New York City. He had come to the United States in the hope of securing fi-
nancial help for the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA),
which he had founded in Jamaica two years earlier. After delivering his first
public speech in Harlem in May, Garvey began a long speaking tour that took
him through thirty-eight states. In May, 1917, he returned to Harlem and—
with the help of his secretary and future wife, Amy Ashwood—organized the
first American chapter of the UNIA. Though hardly noticed at the time, the
establishment of this organization was a significant first step in the growth of
black nationalism in the United States. Within a few years, the UNIA would
claim millions of members and hundreds of branches throughout the United
States, the Caribbean region, and Africa, and Garvey would be one of the
most famous black people in the world.
The Beginnings of the UNIA Garvey was born in St. Ann’s Bay, Jamaica,
in 1887. He claimed to be of pure African descent. His father was a descen-
dant of the maroons, or Jamaican slaves, who successfully revolted against
their British masters in 1739. During his early years, Garvey gradually became
aware that his color was considered by some in his society to be a badge of in-
feriority. Jamaica, unlike the United States, placed the mulatto in a higher
caste as a buffer against the unlettered black masses. This reality caused a
sense of racial isolation and yet pride to grow in the young black man. By
his twentieth birthday, Garvey had started a program to change the lives of
black Jamaicans. While working as a foreman in a printing shop in 1907, he
joined a labor strike as a leader. The strike, quickly broken by the shop own-
ers, caused Garvey to lose faith in reform through labor unions. In 1910, he
started publishing a newspaper, Garvey’s Watchman, and helped form a politi-
cal organization, the National Club. These efforts, which were not particu-
larly fruitful, gave impetus to Garvey’s visit to Central America where he was
667
able to observe the wretched conditions of black people in Costa Rica and
Panama.
Garvey’s travels led him to London, the center of the British Empire.
There the young man met Dusé Mohamed Ali, an Egyptian scholar, who in-
creased the young Jamaican’s knowledge and awareness of Africa. During his
stay in England, Garvey also became acquainted with the plight of African
Americans through reading Booker T. Washington’s Up from Slavery (1901).
Washington’s autobiography raised questions in Garvey’s mind:
I asked, where is the black man’s Government? Where is his King and his King-
dom? Where is his President, his country and his ambassador, his army, his navy,
his men of big affairs? I could not find them, and then I declared, I will help to
make them.
Returning to Jamaica in 1914, Garvey created a self-help organization for

black people to which he gave the imposing title, the Universal Negro Im-
provement and Conservation Association and African Communities League.
This new organization, renamed the Universal Negro Improvement Associa-
tion, based its philosophy on the need to unite “all people of Negro or Afri-
can parentage.” The goals of the UNIA were to increase racial pride, to aid
black people throughout the world, and “to establish a central nation for the
race.” Garvey, elected the first president of the UNIA, realized that black peo-
ple would have to achieve these goals without assistance from white people.
This self-help concept, similar to the philosophy (but not the practice) of
Booker T. Washington, led Garvey to propose a black trade school in Kings-
ton, Jamaica, similar to Washington’s Tuskegee Institute. The idea did not at-
tract wide support, and Garvey was temporarily frustrated.
In 1915, Garvey decided to come to the United States in order to seek aid
for his Jamaica-based organization. Although he had corresponded with
Washington, the black leader had died before Garvey arrived in the United
States in 1916. Garvey went directly to Harlem, which during the early twenti-
eth century was becoming a center of black culture.
The lives of African Americans were rapidly changing in the first two de-
cades of the twentieth century. Metropolitan areas in the North were experi-
encing mass migrations of African Americans from the South. In New York
City, for example, the black population increased from 91,709 in 1910 to
152,467 in 1920. African Americans were attracted by the promise of jobs and
by the possibility of escaping the rigid system of segregation in the South.
African Americans found, however, that they could not escape racism sim-
ply by moving. Northern whites also believed in the racial inferiority of Afri-
can Americans and opposed black competitors for their jobs. The new immi-
grants, like their foreign-born counterparts, were crowded into the northern
ghettos without proper housing or the possibility of escape. Racial violence
broke out in several northern cities. The North proved not to be a utopia for
African Americans.
668
These harsh realities aided

Garvey in establishing the UNIA
in New York. The population
of Harlem was not attracted to
the accommodationist philos-
ophy of Washington or the
middle-class goals of the Na-
tional Association for the Ad-
vancement of Colored People.
Indeed, urban African Ameri-
cans were wary of all prophets,
even Garvey; but the young
Jamaican was able to obtain
support from the Jamaican im-
migrants in Harlem, who felt
isolated, and he established a
branch of the UNIA there in
1917. At first, the organization
encountered difficulties. Local Marcus Garvey, the founder of the Universal Negro Im-
politicians tried to gain con- provement Association, was deported from the United
trol of it, and Garvey had to States in 1927 and eventually returned to his Jamaican
fight to save its autonomy. The homeland, where he died in relative obscurity. (Library
original branch of the UNIA of Congress)
was dissolved, and a charter was
obtained from the state of New York which prevented other groups from us-
ing the organization’s name. By 1918, under Garvey’s exciting leadership,
the New York chapter of the UNIA boasted 3,500 members. By 1919, Garvey
optimistically claimed 2 million members for his organization throughout
the world and 200,000 subscribers for his weekly newspaper, The Negro World.
The Black Star Line and the Collapse of the UNIA In an effort to
promote the economic welfare of African Americans under the auspices of
the UNIA, Garvey established in 1919 two joint stock companies—the Black
Star Line, an international commercial shipping company, and the Negro
Factories Corporation, which was to “build and operate factories . . . to manu-
facture every marketable commodity.” Stock in these companies was sold only
to black investors. The Black Star Line was to establish commerce with Africa
and transport willing emigrants “back to Africa.” Although both companies
were financial failures, they gave many black people a feeling of dignity. As a
result of his promotional efforts in behalf of the Black Star Line, the federal
government, prodded by rival black leaders, had Garvey indicted for fraudu-
lent use of the mails in 1922. He was tried, found guilty, and sent to prison in
1923. Although his second wife, Amy Jacques-Garvey, worked to hold the
UNIA together, it declined rapidly. In 1927, Garvey was released from prison
and deported as an undesirable alien. He returned to Jamaica and then went
669
Vietnamese immigrants
to London and Paris and tried to resurrect the UNIA, but with little success.
He died in poverty in London in 1940. Although a bad businessman, Garvey
was a master propagandist and popular leader who made a major contribu-
tion to race consciousness among African Americans.
John C. Gardner
updated by R. Kent Rasmussen
Further Reading
Cronon, E. David. Black Moses: The Story of Marcus Garvey and the Universal Ne-
gro Improvement Association. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1955.
Often reprinted, this biography remains the best introduction to Garvey’s
life.
Garvey, Marcus. Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey. Edited by Amy
Jacques-Garvey, with new introduction by Robert A. Hill. New York: Athen-
eum, 1992. Classic collection of Garvey’s speeches and writings assembled
by his wife.
Hill, Robert A., ed. The Marcus Garvey and Universal Negro Improvement Associa-
tion Papers. 10 vols. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983-2006. The
most extensive collection of original documents by and about Garvey and
his movement.
Hill, Robert A., and Barbara Bair, eds. Marcus Garvey: Life and Lessons. Berke-
ley: University of California Press, 1987. Collection of Garvey’s most didac-
tic writings, including autobiographical material that he wrote in 1930. A
long appendix includes biographies of figures important in his life.
Lewis, Rupert, and Maureen Warner-Lewis, eds. Garvey: Africa, Europe, the
Americas. Kingston, Jamaica: Institute of Social and Economic Research,
University of the West Indies, 1986. Collection of original research papers
on international aspects of Garveyism.
See also African immigrants; Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Jamaican immi-

grants; Literature; West Indian immigrants.
Identifcation: Immigrants to North America from the Southeast Asian na-
tion of Vietnam

riage; Refugees
Significance: Large numbers of Vietnamese refugees fled to North America

after the Vietnam War, disrupting their lives and forcing them to adapt to
mainstream American culture.
670
In order to understand Vietnam- Vietnamese Immigration

ese American family customs, it is to the United States,
important to examine briefly the 1952-2003
historical background of Vietnam-
ese immigration to North Amer- 30,000 1975
ica. Technically, the Vietnamese End of
were not immigrants at all, but Vietnam
25,000 War
refugees. Refugees are people who

leave their native land and are
afraid to return because of perse- 20,000
cution and the threat of death.
The Vietnamese sought safety in
15,000
North America, a direct result of
U.S. involvement in the war be-
tween North and South Vietnam. 10,000
Background When the United 1995

5,000 U.S.-Vietnamese
States ended its military involve- relations
ment in Vietnam in 1974, it left normalized
behind many Vietnamese citizens 0
who had been connected to the
1952-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
United States in some way. During
the period immediately preced-
ing the fall of Saigon on April 30,
1975, about 100,000 Vietnamese
were evacuated. Many of this “first Source: U.S . Census Bureau.
wave” were people who feared that
their involvement with the Americans would lead to persecution or death
under North Vietnamese communist rule. Most of this first group of refu-
gees were educated urban-dwellers, about half of whom were Roman Cath-
olic.
Within two years after the fall of Saigon, the second wave of Vietnamese be-
gan leaving Vietnam. Many left by boat in order to escape ethnic and religious
persecution as well as deprivation. Of this group, many were ethnic Chinese.
Others were Montagnards who had allied themselves with American intelli-
gence during the Vietnam War. Other minority groups fleeing Vietnam in-
cluded the Cham and the Khmer, as well as the Hmong from nearby Cambo-
dia. The second wave of refugees was generally less educated than earlier
immigrants, and they were often from the countryside.
A final group of refugees were the Amerasians, the children of American
military personnel and (usually) Vietnamese women. The Amerasians, called
bui doi (dust of life), were subjected to harassment and discrimination in Viet-
nam under communist rule. While many were killed, many other Amerasian
children lived homeless in the streets. Eventually, some 68,000 settled in the
United States under a special program for Amerasians.
671
To speak of Vietnamese Americans as a homogeneous group is clearly an er-

ror. The refugees brought with them different customs, biases, and prejudices.
Moreover, while their refugee status allowed them to enter North America
more easily than other immigrant groups, it was also a source of trauma and
pain. Many expected the move to be temporary and that they would soon re-
turn to Vietnam. Many had left family members behind, thinking that they
would return or that they would be able to send for their families after they
were settled.
Demographics When the Vietnamese refugees came to the United States,

they were settled by voluntary agencies who found sponsors for each family to
help with the transition to life in the United States. As a result, the Vietnam-
ese people were deliberately scattered throughout the country, the reasoning
being that they would assimilate more quickly if they were on their own in the
midst of mainstream American culture. What the well-intentioned voluntary
agencies failed to consider is the importance of family in Vietnamese culture.
Since most refugees had left their extended families behind, they needed to
establish communities where other Vietnamese could take the place of the
larger family. Therefore, once the refugees were initially settled in the United
States, many moved a second time to be nearer to family members and other
Vietnamese people.
Many Vietnamese subsequently moved to California. The 1990 census
showed that 45 percent of the Vietnamese American population lived in Cali-
fornia, where the city of Westminster, in Southern California, has become the
center of Vietnamese culture and economics in the United States. By 1998,
the population of Vietnamese Americans had reached one million. Between
2000 and 2003, new immigrants from Vietnam entered the United States at a
rate of more than 28,000 persons a year.
During the 1990’s, Westminster alone had some 1,500 Vietnamese busi-
nesses. Texas has about 11 percent of the Vietnamese American population,
followed by Washington with 4.8 percent, Virginia with 3.5 percent, and Loui-
siana with 2.9 percent. Florida and Pennsylvania also have significant Viet-
namese American populations.
Most Vietnamese Americans live in established Vietnamese communities
in urban areas. They represent 8 percent of the total Asian American popula-
tion and numbered around 593,213 in 1990. Of these, 31 percent arrived be-
fore 1980, 49 percent arrived between 1980 and 1990, and 20 percent are na-
tive born. In 1990 most Vietnamese Americans lived in family units headed by
a father and a mother, although about 16 percent lived in female-headed
households.
Cultural Identity For the Vietnamese, family is the most important foun-
dation of their society. The trauma and disruption caused by war and flight
forced the refugees into situations in which their cultural norms shifted. In re-
sponse to the fact that many Vietnamese were deprived of their families,
672
“adopted” kin groups grew up in Vietnamese communities, and family mem-

bers moved to be closer to other family members arriving in North America.
When the Vietnamese refugees arrived in North America, they quickly
looked for work in order to survive and as a matter of self-respect. Among im-
migrant groups, Vietnamese Americans have a high employment rate. Never-
theless, many found themselves in jobs of lower socioeconomic status than
the ones they left behind in Vietnam. In addition, Vietnamese women often
found work more easily than did their husbands, largely because they looked
for lower-status jobs. Nevertheless, the Vietnamese American self-perception
is that they are hard-working, tenacious survivors; most adapted to their
changed circumstances fairly quickly.
Religion, Holidays, and Ceremonies One way that Vietnamese Ameri-

cans maintain their cultural identity is through the observance of their reli-
gions. Many of the early refugees were Roman Catholics, and Vietnamese
Americans have demonstrated leadership in the Roman Catholic Church.
The majority of Vietnamese are Buddhists, and Buddhism affects the way
most Vietnamese Americans view life. For the Buddhist, all life is suffering and
the end to suffering comes only with the suppression of desire, which can be
accomplished by following the Eightfold Path, which includes right speech,
right action, right intention, right views, right livelihood, self-discipline, self-
mastery, and contemplation. Confucianism is also a strong tradition among
Vietnamese Americans. This philosophy has at its core the attention to social
and familial order. A hierarchical system, Confucianism teaches the impor-
tance of filial piety.
There are a number of other smaller religious sects among the Vietnam-
ese, including Taoism, Cao Dai, and Hoa Hao, which also exert influence on
the Vietnamese American community. In each case, however, the buildings
housing the various religious institutions often serve as meeting places and
community centers for Vietnamese Americans.
Vietnamese Americans also preserve their cultural identity through the
observance of Vietnamese holidays and traditions. By far the most important
festival for Vietnamese Americans is Tet Nguyen Den, the Lunar New Year. It
usually falls on three days at the end of January and the beginning of Febru-
ary. Tet is a family holiday, and all members of the family express appreciation
and respect for one another. During Tet people give each other gifts, wear
their best clothing, prepare special foods, and honor their ancestors. For
Vietnamese Americans, this holiday is the cultural, social, and spiritual high
point of the year.
The Family and Cultural Change As family structure is the underpin-

ning of Vietnamese culture, each person thinks of himself in relation to the
other members of his nuclear and extended family. The father is traditionally
the head of the family, while the mother must ensure harmony within the
family unit. Children are valued and considered treasures. They are responsi-
673
Vietnamese-Chinese grocery store in New York City’s Lower Manhattan.

(Smithsonian Institution)
ble for taking care of their parents in old age. Much of this structure arrived
intact with the refugees. Yet, because so many refugees left members of their
families behind and because so many men found that their wives must work in
order to help support their families, family structure and identity shifted as
Vietnamese Americans grew into the American mainstream culture.
Children and adolescents have been placed under pressure by the tension
between traditional and North American culture. Since they often learn En-
glish more quickly than their parents, young people find themselves having
to translate and solve problems for their parents, leading to a role reversal
that would not be typical in Vietnamese society. In addition, young people are
subjected to the same pressures that other young North Americans face:
drugs, alcohol, and gangs. Although much has been made of gangs among
Vietnamese American youths, most scholars think that this has been exagger-
674
ated. In spite of the difficulties encountered by young Vietnamese, it seems

clear that most young people still value education as do their families. As a
group, Vietnamese Americans excel in school and continue their education
past high school.
Vietnamese Americans continue to work toward stability within the main-
stream culture. Many Vietnamese incorporate American ways without disre-
garding Vietnamese ways. In spite of the difficulties that Vietnamese Ameri-
cans have experienced in their new home, the family remains the source of
support and stability for their culture.
Diane Andrews Henningfeld
Further Reading
Bass, Thomas. Vietnamerica: The War Comes Home. New York: Soho Press, 1996.
Important account of the lives of Vietnamese refugees who came to the
United States after the Vietnam War ended.
Caplan, Nathan, Marcella H. Choy, and John K. Whitmore. Children of the Boat
People: A Study of Educational Success. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1991. Widely cited study about the second generation of Vietnamese
Americans.
Cargill, Mary Terrell, and Jade Quang Huynh, eds. Voices of Vietnamese Boat
People: Nineteen Narratives of Escape and Survival. Jefferson, N.C.: McFar-
land, 2000. Firsthand narratives of Vietnamese immigrants who fled their
homeland at the conclusion of the Vietnam War.
ern immigrants from many nations, including two from Vietnam.
Du Phuoc Long, Patrick, with Laura Ricard. The Dream Shattered: Vietnamese
Gangs in America. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1996. Account of
young Vietnamese Americans involved in crime.
Nguyen, Qui Duc. Where the Ashes Are: The Odyssey of a Vietnamese Family. Read-
ing, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1994. Study of the experience of one Vietnam-
ese family that immigrated to the United States.
of papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants; in-
cludes a chapter on Vietnamese immigrants.
Rutledge, Paul James. The Vietnamese Experience in America. Bloomington: Indi-
ana University Press, 1992. Perhaps the best general study of Vietnamese
American resettlement.
Vu, Nguy, ed. Risking Death to Find Freedom: Thirty Escape Stories by Vietnamese
Boat People. Westminster, Calif.: VAALA & NV Press, 2005. Firsthand ac-
counts of Vietnamese refugees who fled their homeland after the Vietnam
War.
Yarborough, Trin. Surviving Twice: Amerasian Children of the Vietnam War.
675
Visas
Dulles, Va.: Potomac Books, 2005. Study of the often difficult adjustments
that Vietnamese immigrants have had to make in the United States.
Zhou, Min, and Carl L. Bankston III. Straddling Two Social Worlds: The Experi-
ence of Vietnamese Refugee Children in the United States. New York: ERIC Clear-
inghouse on Urban Education, Institute for Urban and Minority Educa-
tion, Teachers College, Columbia University, 2000. Sociological study of
Vietnamese immigrant chidren in the United States.
See also Amerasians; Asian American stereotypes; Asian American women;

Hmong immigrants; Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization Service; Refugee
fatigue; Southeast Asian immigrants; War brides.
Visas
Definition: Endorsements made on passports of people entering countries
other than their own to indicate that the passports have been examined
and that their bearers may proceed into the countries
Immigration issues: Border control; Labor; Law enforcement
Significance: Visas issued by U.S. consular officers are usually required of

noncitizens as a condition of entry into the United States.
United States immigration law provides a double buffer restricting non-

citizen admission to the United States. With few exceptions, noncitizens must
obtain visas issued by consular officers, State Department officials working in
the noncitizens’ countries. Without a visa, most noncitizens are summarily
excluded from the United States by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security. Even if nonciti-
zens have visas, the INS can still deny them entry based on the INS’s assess-
ment of their eligibility to enter the United States. A visa is a travel document
allowing noncitizens to travel to the United States and present themselves for
admission. Although usually necessary for entry, it does not guarantee entry.
State Department consular officers issue two basic types of visas: immi-
grant visas, for those persons coming to the United States to become perma-
nent resident aliens, and nonimmigrant visas, for those who plan to come to
the United States temporarily for pleasure, work, or study. Most immigrant vi-
sas are distributed to persons who have family ties to persons in the United
States and to persons who possess job skills needed by U.S. employers. Out of
approximately 675,000 immigrant slots each year, 55,000 are issued by a lot-
tery weighted in favor of individuals from countries with low levels of immi-
gration to the United States.
676
Visas
Family Immigrant Visas United States immigration policy favors non-

citizens with certain family ties to persons in the United States. Children,
spouses, and parents of U.S. citizens are called “immediate relatives” and re-
ceive the highest priority under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952,
better known as the McCarran-Walter Act. To be considered a “child” for im-
migration purposes, a person must be under twenty-one years of age and un-
married. Unless they have undesirable traits, such as a criminal background,
immediate relatives can obtain immigrant visas. The United States grants an
unlimited number of immediate relative visas every year.
Other noncitizens seeking immigrant visas based on family ties are subject
to an annual numerical quota, fluctuating between 226,000 and 480,000 an-
nually. These visas are split into four categories for processing and numerical
purposes: unmarried sons and daughters (grown unmarried children) of
U.S. citizens; spouses, children, and unmarried sons and daughters of perma-
nent resident aliens; married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens; and siblings
of U.S. citizens. Because of the quotas placed on these categories of immi-
grants, backlogs develop. For example, there is about a ten-year wait to bring
a sibling to the United States from Costa Rica.
Employment Immigrant Visas United States immigration policy also fa-

vors industrious aliens who possess skills desired by or in short supply in the
U.S. labor market. This policy conflicts with another policy, which seeks to
protect the United States labor market. This tension is resolved in two ways:
first, by placing numerical limits (approximately 140,000) on the number of
these visas issued annually and, second, by imposing job offer and labor
market tests on employment immigration, allowing noncitizens to receive an
employment-based immigrant visa only if they have an offer of employment
in the United States. Immigrants can meet this second condition only if there
are no qualified U.S. workers able and willing to work in the jobs sought by
immigrants, if employers pay prevailing wages, and if the hiring of aliens does
not otherwise adversely affect the U.S. labor market.
If it is in the national interest, the attorney general’s office may waive the
job offer and labor market requirements for aliens who are members of pro-
fessions for which an advanced degree is required or for aliens of exceptional
ability. The job offer and labor market requirements are inapplicable to
aliens with extraordinary abilities, as documented by sustained national or in-
ternational acclaim, and to outstanding professors and researchers. The la-
bor market test is also not applicable to certain multinational managers and
executives engaged in intracompany transfers.
Nonimmigrant Business and Employment Visas Many people seek to

come to the United States temporarily to perform some type of work for an
infinite variety of reasons. Some come for business meetings and others to
market their goods. Still others come to perform warranty work or to start
new businesses. Some noncitizens come to the United States temporarily as
677
Visas
U.S. Visa Categories

Family-based immigrant visas (all immigrant visa categories except the immedi-
ate relative category are subject to numerical restrictions)
Visas for immediate relatives: spouses, children, and parents of U.S. citizens
• First preference: unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens
• Second preference: spouses and the unmarried sons and daughters (includ-
ing children) of permanent resident aliens
• Third preference: married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens
• Fourth preference: brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
Employment-based immigrant visas
• First preference: “priority workers,” which includes aliens of extraordinary
ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and certain multinational ex-
ecutives and managers
• Second preference: aliens who are members of the professions holding ad-
vanced degrees and aliens of exceptional ability
• Third preference: skilled workers, professionals, and other workers
• Fourth preference: diverse group of “special immigrants,” including certain
religious ministers, retired U.S. employees, and former U.S. military per-
sonnel
• Fifth preference: aliens who come to the United States to create employment
opportunities by investing and engaging in a new commercial enterprise
Visas for diversity immigrants (aliens who win a lottery weighted in favor of aliens
from countries and regions that have a low immigrant stream to the United
States)
Nonimmigrant visas (nonimmigrant visas are designated by the letter of the al-
phabet preceding the description; for example, an F Visa is a study visa)
• A. Ambassadors, public ministers, other foreign government officials, their
spouses, children, and servants
• B. Temporary visitors for business or pleasure
• C. Aliens in transit
• D. Alien crew members
• E. Treaty traders, treaty investors, and their spouses and children
• F. Students attending an academic institution, and their spouses and chil-
dren
• G. Representatives of foreign governments to international organizations,
officers and employees of international organizations, and the spouses, chil-
dren, and servants of such persons
(continued)
678
Visas
• H. Temporary workers, including registered nurses, workers in “speciality oc-

cupations,” agricultural workers, other workers, and the spouses, children,
and servants of such persons
• I. Foreign media representatives, and their spouses and children
• J. Exchange visitors, including those participating in academic exchanges,
and their spouses and children
• K. Fiancés of U.S. citizens
• L. Certain intracompany transferees, and their spouses and children
• M. Vocational students, and their spouses and children
• N. Officials of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and their
spouses and children
• O. Aliens of extraordinary ability in certain fields, their spouses and chil-
dren, and certain assistants
• P. Certain artists and entertainers, and their spouses and children
• Q. Aliens participating in certain international cultural exchanges
• R. Religious workers, and their spouses and children
• S. Certain aliens who, according to the attorney general or the secretary of
state, possess critical reliable information concerning criminal or terrorist
organizations and the spouses, unmarried sons and daughters (including
children), and parents of such persons
part of an intracompany transfer and others to enter the U.S. labor market
for a temporary period of time, often in the hope of becoming permanent
residents in the future.
U.S. law categorizes the variety of justifications for coming to the United
States for business or employment purposes by offering different types of vi-
sas for different situations. For example, the B visa allows noncitizens to come
to the United States for business meetings. The H visa, for temporary work-
ers, raises the same concerns about protecting the U.S. labor market as
employment-based immigrant visas. The tension is resolved in a similar fash-
ion by imposing annual quotas on the number of H visas and by requiring a
labor market test. In some situations, these quotas can be circumvented if
aliens qualify for an L visa as company managers, executives, or employees
who have specialized knowledge and come to the United States in an intra-
company transfer. These quotas may also be circumvented if persons qualify
for an E visa as the employees of treaty traders or treaty investors—persons
who, pursuant to treaties between their countries and the United States,
come to the United States to engage in substantial trade with their home
countries or to develop and direct enterprises in which they have made a sub-
stantial investment.
Several million foreigners come to the United States as tourists every year
679
Visas
on B visas. Additionally, several hundred thousand persons come to the

United States to study or participate in cultural exchanges. Many of these
people travel on F, J, or M visas. Foreign students at U.S. academic institutions
have most likely traveled to the United States on F visas, which normally allow
students to stay in the United States for the duration of their studies. J visas
are used by students in special circumstances, such as when the U.S. govern-
ment or a foreign government pays for students’ education or when students
come to the United States to acquire skills that are specifically needed in their
native countries. In such instances, J visa holders may not apply for perma-
nent residence in the United States until they have returned to their home
countries for two years. M visas are used by vocational students and are more
restrictive because of the higher incidence of immigration fraud and abuse
among vocational students.
Visa Processing For most immigrant categories, visa processing begins

with a visa petition filed with the INS by a petitioning employer or family
member in the United States. The alien seeking an immigration benefit is
considered the beneficiary of the petition. Once the INS has done its back-
ground work, the file is sent to a visa consular officer overseas for processing.
Depending on the category, some nonimmigrant visas begin with petitions to
the INS and others in the visa consular office.
Even if persons seeking a visa fit into one of the INS’s immigrant or
nonimmigrant categories, visa consular officers deny them visas if it is deter-
mined that the persons are inadmissible. Aliens can be held inadmissible on
certain health-related grounds, because of prior abuse of U.S. immigration
laws, because of certain criminal activity, on national security grounds, and
because they may become an economic burden. Additionally, if visa consular
officials doubt that nonimmigrants will leave the United States at the ap-
pointed time, such aliens can be denied visas.
To ensure that visa applicants qualify for admission to the United States, a
personal interview with the visa consular office is often required. There is no
judicial review of a denial of a visa application.
Michael A. Scaperlanda
Further Reading
Beshara, Edward C., et al. Emigrating to the U.S.A.: A Complete Guide to Immigra-
tion, Temporary Visas, and Employment. New York: Hippocrene Books, 1994.
Comprehensive reference on practical immigration issues designed for
immigrants.
ABC-Clio, 1999. Useful handbook of terms used in immigration law.
Kurzban, Ira. Kurzban’s Immigration Law Sourcebook: A Comprehensive Outline
and Reference Tool. 8th ed. Washington, D.C.: American Immigration Law
Foundation, 2002. Comprehensive overview of U.S. immigration law and
visas. Frequently updated.
680
War brides
law.
many, and Japan.
See also Demographics of immigration; Green cards; Immigration Act of

1990; Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha; Immigration “crisis”;
Immigration law; September 11 terrorist attacks; Undocumented workers;
War brides.
War brides
Definition: Foreign spouses of American service personnel serving abroad
during wartime

and naturalization; Demographics; European immigrants; Families and
marriage; Women
Significance: Despite war-related problems, foreign brides, fiancés, and

children of servicemen entered the United States in large numbers be-
tween 1943 and 1975 and raised new isses relating to U.S. immigration pol-
icies.
War brides were non-American immigrants who were married or engaged to

American servicemen stationed or assigned in a foreign country during, or as
a result of World War II, the Korean War, or the Vietnam War. Estimates of the
number of war brides from World War II vary widely from 115,000 to one mil-
lion, depending on whether children and other dependents are included, on
the chosen time period, and on who is included as a war bride. World War II
war brides came from almost sixty nations. The first and largest single group
was British. Others came later from Japan, the Philippines, Korea, Thailand,
Vietnam, and China.
681
War brides
War Brides and Immigration Law The military at first discouraged over-
seas marriages and engagements because it was feared that they would not
last and that they would divert servicemen’s attention from the task at hand:
fulfilling their military duties and responsibilities. Evidence from World
War I suggested otherwise, as 6,400 of the 8,000 marriages between foreign
women and American servicemen were permanent. Eventually, the military
had to accept the inevitable. Secretly at first, and then by U.S. congressional
legislation, war brides and fiancés were transported to the United States dur-
ing and immediately following World War II, from 1943 to 1952.
Although war brides were at first subject to the same naturalization process
as other immigrants, they were exempt from quota limits. Most who came
during World War II were wives and families of husbands who had been
wounded or released from enemy prisoner of war camps. After the war, laws
were passed with the intent of providing more orderly means for war brides to
enter the United States. Asian war brides faced special problems because of
the Oriental Exclusion Act of 1924. However, race and gender were removed
as a bar to immigration to the United States after passage of the McCarran-
Walter Act of 1952. The number of Asian war brides increased dramatically
from 1952 to the end of the Vietnam War in 1975.
British War Brides The first and largest contingent of war brides, fiancés,
and children, approximately seventy thousand persons from Great Britain,
World War II English war brides arrive in North America by ship. (Pier 21 Society)
682
War brides
entered the United States during the mid-1940’s. During wartime they were
secretly transported on ships carrying wounded servicemen, former prison-
ers of war, and enemy prisoners. After the war ended, considerable resent-
ment was directed toward the transportation of war brides to the United
States, because they occupied space that could have been filled by returning
servicemen. At first, most military brides were ineligible for army transport,
because only officers and noncommissioned officers in the top three enlisted
ranks were allowed to use military transportation. The alternative for those in
the lower four ranks was expensive commercial transportation until 1944,
when they too became eligible for transportation at the army’s expense.
The foreign wives of military husbands did not automatically receive U.S.
citizenship. Rather, war brides were eligible for visas only and had to meet the
same naturalization requirements as other immigrants. War brides were ad-
vantaged by not being included in immigration quotas established for their
native countries. Children were admitted without restriction as long as fa-
thers had been over twenty-one years of age when the children were born and
had lived in the United States for more than ten years.
Responding to pleas and pressures, Congress approved Public Law 271,
the War Brides Act of December 28, 1945, the single most important piece of
legislation pertaining to World War II war brides. The visa requirement was
waived. If husbands of war brides were serving in the armed forces or had
been honorably discharged, their wives and minor children could become
U.S. citizens provided they had applied for citizenship during the three-year
life of the act and had passed a medical examination. As had been the case
earlier, war brides were nonquota immigrants.
One problem remained; Public Law 271 was directed at war brides and
children only. It did not apply to alien fiancés or, indeed, fiancés of American
servicewomen. Congress responded again by passing Public Law 471, the
Fiancés Act, on June 29, 1946. Foreign women and men engaged to present
or former members of the armed forces whose status was identical to those in-
cluded in Public Law 271 could obtain passport visas allowing them to enter
the United States as temporary visitors for three months. If their marriages
occurred during those three months, Public Law 271 applied. Otherwise,
fiancés, with some exceptions, were compelled to leave the United States or
be deported. In fact, the U.S. attorney general now possessed the power to re-
quire prospective American spouses to provide a bond, usually five hundred
dollars, to cover all possible deportation expenses. Public Law 471 was in ef-
fect for eighteen months, until December 28, 1947.
Plans were made to provide thirty ships to transport sixty thousand British
war brides, grooms, and children by the end of June, 1946. An additional six-
teen thousand came from Australia and New Zealand. The first official con-
tingent of 452 war brides (thirty of whom were pregnant), 173 children, and
one war groom left England on January 26, 1946. The youngest bride was six-
teen years old and had an eighteen-month-old daughter, while the oldest was
forty years old and had a seventeen-year-old daughter from a previous mar-
683
War brides
riage. Their American spouses had been wounded, were hospitalized in the
United States, or had been deployed there.
Of the seventy thousand World War II British war brides who entered the
United States, most came from lower-middle-class backgrounds. Most also
had completed their education at age fourteen. Their average age was twenty-
four. British war brides were less likely than those from other nations to set-
tle in a single ethnic community, in large part because of the absence of a
language barrier. They were well received. Yet, many retained a strong bond
with their homeland and were never completely assimilated into American
society.
Brides from Germany and Austria War brides came in much smaller
numbers from other European nations, including from World War II enemy
countries Germany and Austria. American servicemen were warned against
marrying German women. Order Number 1067, issued in April, 1945, by the
Allied Chiefs of Staff, made it clear that Germany was occupied as a defeated
nation, not for liberation. Fraternization with German officials and the Ger-
man population was strongly discouraged. Yet, Order 1067 was seldom en-
forced and almost universally ignored. German women who kept company
with Americans were often referred to as “Ami whores” by other Germans.
The term was applied both to German prostitutes and to German women em-
ployed by Americans. The tension created by opponents of fraternization was
reduced when American military personnel who had participated in liberat-
ing the Nazi prisoner of war camps or who had fought against the Germans
were sent home and replaced by troops who had not experienced wartime
conditions.
Restrictions on fraternization were lifted in Austria in August, 1945, and in
Germany the following October. A year later the ban on American service-
men’s marrying Austrian and German women was lifted. By the end of De-
cember, 1946, 2,500 soldiers had applied to marry German women. Mar-
riages, however, could not take place until American soldiers were within
thirty days of completing their overseas tours of duty.
Asian War Brides Initially, all Asians—whether nominal allies, such as the
Chinese, or enemies—were subject to prewar immigration laws and quotas.
During World War II Congress passed Public Law 199, the Magnuson Act of
1943, which repealed the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act but set a quota of only
105 Chinese immigrants annually. Eventually, Chinese wives of American citi-
zens were given nonquota status through an act passed on August 9, 1946.
Most of the six thousand Chinese war brides married Chinese American sol-
diers.
The most significant legislation assisting all Asian war brides, the McCarran-
Walter Act, was passed by Congress on June 27, 1952. It repealed the Oriental
Exclusion Act of 1924 by eliminating both race and gender as a barrier to im-
migration. From 1947 to 1975 more than 165,000 Asian war brides entered the
684
War Brides Act
United States. Most were Japanese (66,000) and Filipino (52,000), although
28,000 Koreans, 11,000 Thais, and 8,000 Vietnamese were also admitted.
Asian war brides experienced prejudice and discrimination from both
native-born Americans and from their fellow Asians, including women who
lived in the United States. As one Korean author expressed it, they were
“caught in the shadows between the Korean and American communities” and
would never be able to become members of Korean American society. Be-
cause of the difficulty in learning the English language, Asian war brides re-
lied heavily on their American husbands. Isolation and the depression it pro-
voked was the most common concern expressed by Asian war brides. Living
on military bases magnified their loneliness. Yet, most chose to remain in the
United States rather than return to their native countries.
John Quinn Imholte
Further Reading
Gimbel, John. The American Occupation of Germany: Politics and the Military.
Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1968.
Hibbert, Joyce. The War Brides. Toronto, Canada: PMA Books, 1978.
Moore, John Hammond. Over-Sexed, Over-Paid, and Over Here: Americans in
Australia, 1941-45. St. Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press,
1981.
Shukert, Elfrieda Berthiaume, and Barbara Smith Scibetta. War Brides of World
War II. Novato, Calif.: Presidio Press, 1988.
Virden, Jenel. Goodbye Piccadilly: British War Brides in America. Urbana: Univer-
sity of Illinois Press, 1996.
See also Filipino immigrants and family customs; Japanese immigrants;

Korean immigrants and family customs; Mail-order brides; Page law; Picture
brides; Russian immigrants; War Brides Act; Women immigrants.
War Brides Act

The Law: Federal law easing restrictions on immigration of war brides
Immigration issues: Asian immigrants; Citizenship and naturalization; Eu-

ropean immigrants; Families and marriage; Laws and treaties; Women
Significance: The War Brides Act relaxed immigration regulations to allow

foreign-born spouses and children of U.S. military personnel to settle in
the United States more easily.
685
War Brides Act
Between 1939 and 1946, more than sixteen million U.S. servicemen, primar-
ily single and between eighteen and thirty years of age, were deployed to war
theaters in foreign lands. Although the U.S. government discouraged service-
men from marrying at all—believing the single soldier, without distractions,
would be of more value to the war effort—one million marriages to foreign
nationals occurred during and shortly after the war. Aware of the potential
for these liaisons, the U.S. War Department had issued a regulation requiring
personnel on duty in any foreign country or possession of the United States
to notify their commanding officer of any intention to marry at least two
months in advance.
Passage of the Act Before passage of the act, federal immigration law de-
manded strict adherence, and the waiting period was waived rarely for war
brides, with a possible exception for the pregnancy of the bride-to-be. Usually,
permission to marry was granted; however, certain couples, for example U.S.-
German, U.S.-Japanese, and those of different races, either encountered
longer waiting periods or were denied permission completely.
Many of those couples who had been granted permission and had married
were separated for two to three years. In October, 1945, the Married Women’s
Association picketed for transport to allow their families to reunite. Evi-
dently, the three thousand members’ voices were heard; on December 28,
1945, the Seventy-ninth Congress passed an act to expedite the admission to
the United States of alien spouses and alien minor children of U.S. citizens
who had served in or were honorably discharged from the armed forces dur-
ing World War II. These spouses had to meet the criteria for admission under
the current immigration laws, including thorough medical examinations,
and their applications had to be filed within three years of the date of the act.
The War Bride Ships Following passage of the War Brides Act, thirty ves-
sels, primarily hospital ships and army troopships, were selected to transport
the women, children, and a few men—who were dubbed “male war brides”—
to the United States. Even the steamships Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Mary
were recruited for the task, because of their large passenger capacities. Trans-
portation requests were prioritized by the military as follows: dependents
of personnel above the fourth enlisted grade, dependents of personnel al-
ready placed on orders to the United States, wives of prisoners of war, wives of
men wounded in action, and wives of men hospitalized in the United States.
At the bottom of the priority pool were fiancés and spouses in interracial mar-
riages.
Before debarking, each spouse (usually a woman) had to present her pass-
port and visa, her sworn affidavit from her husband that he could and would
support her upon arrival, two copies of her birth certificate, two copies of any
police record she might have, any military discharge papers she might have,
and a railroad ticket to her destination from New York. The families who saw
them off knew they might never see their children and grandchildren again.
686
War Brides Act
The American Red Cross was officially requested by the War Department
to function as a clearinghouse for the brides, and many Red Cross volunteers
served as “trainers” for the women in how to become American wives. Since
many war brides did not speak English, the Red Cross also offered classes to
aid in practical communication skills.
On January 26, 1946, the first war bride ship, the SS Argentina, left South-
ampton, England, with 452 brides, 173 children, and 1 groom on board.
Lauded as the “Pilgrim Mothers” voyage or the “Diaper Run,” the voyage was
highly publicized. Many of the brides, upon arriving in the United States on
February 4, were greeted by the U.S. press.
In Germany and Japan, permission to marry had not easily been attained
and often was not granted at all. The ban on marriage to Germans was lifted
on December 11, 1946, with twenty-five hundred applications submitted by
the end of the year; in Japan, the ban lingered much longer.
During the first months of occupation during the war, approximately one-
half million U.S. soldiers had been stationed in or near Yokohama. Many
young women, fearing for their lives, hid from these “barbarians,” but since
the U.S. military was often the only source of employment, the women were
forced to venture out. The country was in a cultural flux, resulting from eco-
nomic deprivation, matriarchal predominance and female enfranchisement,
and Emperor Hirohito’s renouncement of divinity. As the U.S. soldiers and
Japanese women worked together, romantic relationships often developed,
and because official permission to marry could not be obtained, many such
couples were wed in secret in traditional Japanese ceremonies.
Although as many as 100,000 Japanese brides were deserted, others sought
immigration to the United States. However, one proviso of the War Brides Act
was that émigrés could not be excluded under any other provision of immi-
gration law. The Oriental Exclusion Act of 1924 was still in place, and al-
though Public Law 199 had overridden the act to allow Chinese immigration,
the Japanese were still excluded. Many were not allowed admission to the
United States until July, 1947, when President Harry S. Truman signed the
Soldier Brides Act, a thirty-day reprieve on race inadmissibility.
The Brides in America In many cases, life for the war brides in the United
States was not what they had expected. Many were treated poorly by isolation-
ists who placed personal blame on all foreigners for U.S. involvement in the
war, and many had to tolerate the scorn of former sweethearts who had been
jilted because of them. Because of the influx of soldiers returning to the civil-
ian population, available housing and jobs were limited. Often the brides
found themselves in the middle of a family-run farm, with some as sharecrop-
pers. Frequently, when adjustment to civilian life was difficult for the former
military man, he would rejoin his outfit, leaving the bride behind with his
family—strangers who were sometimes hostile to the foreigner in their midst.
Many of the marriages made in haste soured just as quickly through home-
sickness, promises unkept, or abuse. War brides who were unhappy or abused
687
War Brides Act
often stayed in their marriages, however, from fear of losing their children or
of being deported.
Marriage did not confer automatic citizenship on foreign brides. They
were required to pass exams to be naturalized, and many were still incapable
of communicating in any but their native tongues. Public assistance was un-
available for these women.
Within one year of the mass exodus from Europe and Asia, one out of
three of the war marriages had ended in divorce, and it was predicted that by
1950, the statistics would be two out of three. This prediction proved incor-
rect, however. Many war brides not only preserved their marriages but also
became valuable members of their new communities and contributors to
American culture. In April, 1985, several hundred of these women, men, and
children journeyed to Long Beach, California, for a reunion, appropriately
held aboard the dry-docked Queen Mary.
Joyce Duncan
Further Reading
Hibbert, Joyce. The War Brides. Toronto: PMA Books, 1978. Discussion of the
mobilization and acclimation of war brides.
Kubat, Daniel, et al. The Politics of Migration Policies. New York: Center for Mi-
gration Studies, 1979. Discusses immigration laws and the political control
behind them.
Shukert, Elfrieda Berthiaume, and Barbara Smith Scibetta. War Brides of World
War II. Novato, Calif.: Presidio Press, 1988. Perhaps the definitive work on
the subject of war brides; includes many interviews with brides.
See also Filipino immigrants and family customs; Immigration Act of

1943; Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952; Japanese immigrants; Korean
immigrants and family customs; Mail-order brides; Page law; Picture brides;
Russian immigrants; War brides; Women immigrants.
688

Identification: Immigrants to North America from the West Indian islands
of the Caribbean Sea
Immigration issues: African Americans; Demographics; West Indian immi-

grants
Significance: The success of black West Indian Americans has drawn the at-
tention of sociologists and other scholars and created some conflict with
other African Americans.
Black West Indian immigrants and their descendants, a small group among
the African American population, have achieved considerable economic, ed-
ucational, and political success in the United States relative to native African
Americans. Notable conservatives such as economist Thomas Sowell of Stan-
ford’s Hoover Institution and author Dinesh D’Souza contend that this
group’s relative success in part demonstrates the error in attributing the eco-
nomic and social plight of some African Americans exclusively to racism. The
group’s exceptionalism has also been noted by sociologists such as Stephen
Steinberg in The Ethnic Myth: Race, Ethnicity, and Class in America (1981) and
Reynolds Farley and Walter Allen in The Color Line and the Quality of Life in
America (1989).
The portrayal of exceptionalism is only part of this group’s profile. Struc-
tural shifts in the U.S. economy mean that segments of this community will
face severe sociopsychological adjustments to migration, coupled with con-
stricted assimilation to American society. Pressures against full assimilation
are greater for lower-class West Indians. Typically, middle- and upper-class
professionals alternate between a more inclusive West Indian American or
particularistic African American identity, and the lower/working class chooses
a more ethnically focused, West Indian identity.
West Indian Americans are immigrants from the former British West In-
dian Islands, Belize, and Guyana and their U.S.-born descendants. Most of
the West Indian immigrants arrived in the United States during the late nine-
teenth and early twentieth centuries. In 1924, restrictive immigration legisla-
tion effectively halted immigration from the islands. Most of the immigrants
settled in the Northeast, creating urban ethnic communities in Miami, Florida;
Boston, Massachusetts; Newark, New Jersey; Hartford, Connecticut; and New
York City; they settled in Brooklyn and formed ethnic enclaves in East Flatbush,
Flatbush, Crown Heights, Canarsie, and Midwood districts.
West Indian Exceptionalism Generally, West Indian immigrants have

been perceived as models of achievement for their frugality, emphasis on ed-
ucation, and ownership of homes and small businesses. Economist Sowell ar-
689
West Indian Immigration to the United States,

1821-2003
100,000
95,000
90,000
85,000 1959
Cuban
80,000 Revolution
75,000
70,000
65,000
60,000
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1821-1830
1831-1840
1841-1850
1851-1860
1861-1870
1871-1880
1881-1890
1891-1900
1901-1910
1911-1920
1921-1930
1931-1940
1941-1950
1951-1960
1961-1970
1971-1980
1981-1990
1991-2000
2001-2003
Source: U.S . Census Bureau. Data includes immigrants from all Caribbean isles.
gued that the group’s successes, including those of famous members such as
General Colin Powell, derived from a distinctive cultural capital source and
an aggressive migrant ideology, legacies of their native lands. Home owner-
ship and economic entrepreneurship were financed partly by using a cultural
source of capital, an association called susu (known in West Africa as esusu),
that first reached the West Indian societies during the era of slavery. A susu fa-
cilitates savings, small-scale capital formation, and micro lending. These tra-
ditional associations have been incorporated into mainstream financial orga-
nizations such as credit unions and mortgage and commercial banks as they
adapt to serve the needs of West Indian Americans.
Demographer Albert Murphy, in a report for Medgar Evers College’s Ca-
690
ribbean Research Center in New York, found that in 1990, 29.1 percent of
West Indian Americans had a bachelor’s degree or higher degree, compared
with the U.S. average of 20.3 percent. In addition, their median household in-
come in 1989 was $28,000, compared with $19,750 for African Americans
overall and $31,435 for whites.
Political and Social Incorporation Early immigrants such as Pan-

Africanists Edward Blyden and Marcus Garvey and poet activist Claude McKay
were among the first West Indian Americans to become well-known and well-
respected figures. Other famous West Indian Americans include Congress-
woman Shirley Chisholm; Franklin Thomas, the head of the Ford Founda-
tion; federal judge Constance Baker Motley; Nobel laureate Derek Walcott;
and actor Sidney Poitier. Activist Stokely Carmichael, Deputy U.S. Attorney
General Eric Holder, and Earl Graves, businessman and publisher of Black En-
terprise, have also made impressive efforts on behalf of African Americans.
From the 1930’s to the 1960’s, West Indian American politicians were
elected with the help of the African American vote; many of the West Indians,
believing their stay in the United States to be temporary, did not become citi-
zens and were ineligible to vote. During the 1970’s, this trend changed, and
two congressional districts in New York with heavy concentrations of West In-
dians became represented by African Americans. However, West Indian
Americans, becoming increasingly dissatisfied with African American repre-
sentation, have been fielding their
own candidates in state and local
elections in New York, Connecti-
cut, and New Jersey. These efforts
have been aided by the fact that
since 1993, when legislation less
favorable to the immigrant popula-
tion was passed, West Indian Amer-
icans have been acquiring U.S. citi-
zenship in greater numbers. This
trend in resurgent ethnic political
awareness suggests that West In-
dian Americans may succeed in
electing a member of their group
to office.
Differential Assimilation At
the beginning of the twentieth
century, West Indian Americans
and African Americans held nega-
tive stereotypes of each other and Born on the island of St. Lucia in 1930, Derek
rarely interacted socially. During Walcott won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1992.
the 1930’s, 1940’s, and 1950’s, the (Virginia Schendler)
691
children of some West Indian immigrants downplayed their ethnicity and at-
tempted to integrate into the African American community, but both groups’
images of each other changed slowly. Powell, in his autobiography, My Ameri-
can Journey (1995), recalls his African American father-in-law’s reaction when
he proposed marriage to his daughter Alma: “All my life I’ve tried to stay away
from those damn West Indians and now my daughter’s going to marry one!”
The late 1960’s, with its emphasis on racial solidarity and group identity,
eroded much of the conflict between African Americans and West Indian
Americans and supplanted it with black nationalist sentiments and identity.
At the turn of the twenty-first century, many West Indian Americans were
caught in an identity crisis, unsure of whether they should be West Indians with
a strong ethnic orientation, African Americans with a focus on their racial iden-
tity, or “West Indian Americans” with a more hybrid identity. Class pressures
play influential roles in this identity dilemma. Lower- and working-class West
Indian Americans have strong affiliations with their ethnicity and its cultural
symbols, using the ethnic community as a “structural shield” in their coping
repertoire. However, a growing segment of West Indian American profession-
als regard themselves as West Indian Americans because this identity unites
the more desirable choices by eliminating obstacles to their ultimate assimila-
tion as Americans. In addition, this community is not monolithic, and class di-
visions segment the group as well as influence its responses to racism and
other societal challenges.
Aubrey W. Bonnett
Further Reading
ern immigrants from many nations, including the Caribbean island of Bar-
bados.
Heron, Melonie P. The Occupational Attainment of Caribbean Immigrants in the
United States, Canada, and England. New York: LFB Scholarly Publications,
2001. Useful study of the employment of Afro-Caribbean immigrants.
Parrillo, Vincent. Strangers to These Shores. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon,
1997. General treatment of race and ethnic relations with sections on both
Jamaicans and Rastafarians.
of papers on demographic and family issues relating to immigrants that in-
cludes chapters on West Indians.
692
White ethnics
Oxford University Press, 1999. Study of the West Indian immigrant experi-
ence that contains interviews with Jamaicans in New York City who tell of
contending forces of racism and equal treatment in the United States.
Waters, Mary C. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Re-
alities. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999. Examines the Ja-
maican immigrant experience in the United States.
Watkins-Owens, Irma. Blood Relations: Caribbean Immigrants and the Harlem
Community, 1900-1930. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996. Study
of West Indians in New York City’s predominantly African American com-
munity.
Zphir, Flore. Trends in Ethnic Identification Among Second-Generation Haitian Im-
migrants in New York City. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey, 2001. Close
study of Haitian immigrants in New York City.
See also Afro-Caribbean immigrants; Cuban immigrants; Dominican im-

migrants; Haitian boat people; Haitian immigrants; Jamaican immigrants;
Latinos.
White ethnics
Definition: Immigrants to North America from eastern and southern Euro-
pean nations
Immigration issues: European immigrants
Significance: Immigrants from southern and eastern European nations and

their descendants are often regarded as “ethnics” because they tend to re-
tain their ethnic identities.
White ethnics, or eastern and southern European Americans, have immi-

grated from or are the descendants of immigrants from countries such as It-
aly, Poland, Russia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Austria. South-
ern Europeans began coming to the United States in large numbers between
1800 and 1920. Many of the immigrants were peasants and unskilled laborers.
These immigrants settled in the cities and were often employed in entry-level
jobs in plants and factories. Many southern Europeans and their descendants
remained in this labor sector well into the twentieth century.
Immigrants from southern Europe faced prejudice upon their arrival to
the United States. Protestantism was the dominant religion in the United
States, and many people feared that the increase in Roman Catholic immi-
grants from southern Europe would negatively affect the Protestant mores of
693
Women immigrants
the country. Immigration from this area was sharply reduced with the passage
of the National Origins Act in 1924 but increased again in 1965 when restric-
tive immigration policy ended with the passage of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act of 1965.
Many southern European Americans live in New England, the Mid-Atlantic
States, and the Midwest. Indicators of status such as educational attainment,
occupational level, and income show that southern Europeans as a group
have reached parity with the Anglo-Protestant population and generally have
surpassed non-European groups. In general, southern European Americans
are highly assimilated, and their ethnicity is displayed primarily in symbolic
ways.
Amy J. Orr
Further Reading
Burgan, Michael. Italian Immigrants. New York: Facts On File, 2005.
See also Ashkenazic and German Jewish immigrants; Eastern European

Jewish immigrants; Ethnic enclaves; European immigrant literature; Euro-
pean immigrants, 1790-1892; European immigrants, 1892-1943; German im-
migrants; Gypsy immigrants; Irish immigrants; Irish immigrants and discrimi-
nation; Jewish immigrants; Nativism; Polish immigrants; Russian immigrants;
Soviet Jewish immigrants.
Women immigrants
Immigration issues: Demographics; Families and marriage; Refugees; Women
Significance: Immigrant women have often had to contend with exploit-

ative work situations and greater-than-aveerage risks of physical abuse, in-
cluding domestic violence.
Since the seventeenth century, women have journeyed alone or as members

of families to North America. Coming first from England, Africa, Ireland,
northern and western Europe, in the nineteenth century they immigrated
from southern and eastern Europe and from China and Japan. The major
source of immigration shifted in the twentieth century from Europe to Latin
America and Asia.
694
Women immigrants
Poster issued by the Young Women’s Christian Association

(YWCA) in 1919 to call attention to the contributions of
women immigrants. (Library of Congress)
History In early colonial America, women arrived from England as wives

or were imported as purchased wives. Many came as indentured servants who
were bought and sold like slaves; they endured physical and sexual abuse.
Some were transported as convicts. Female slaves were brought from Africa.
Throughout the eighteenth century, although female immigrants experi-
enced extreme job discrimination, they worked in a variety of trades.
Between 1820 and 1880, many women settled in the rural Midwest, where
life on the prairies was lonely and harsh. In urban areas, the most commonly
available work for young single women was domestic service, although as the
century progressed they began to find employment in factories. Married
women often preferred to undertake piecework at home or to take in board-
ers. Compared to men, there was a high proportion of destitute immigrant
women. In towns and cities, women joined the developing union movement
and began to speak out against intolerable working conditions. Their first
strike was organized in 1825, when the United Tailoresses of New York de-
manded higher wages. By 1859, of the six million workers in the United
695
Women immigrants
States, half a million were women. They labored as domestic servants (33,000),
teachers (55,000), and factory workers (181,000), half of whom were em-
ployed in textile mills. Leonora Barry, an Irish immigrant, commented on
the largest problem for female workers:
Through long years of endurance they have acquired, as a sort of second nature,
the habit of submission and acceptance without question of any terms offered
them.
From 1880 to 1920, arrivals from Europe substantially increased. For women,
positions as domestic servants continued to be most easily secured. In 1900,
when white-collar jobs became available to women, Irish women worked in
Canada and the United States as office workers, shop clerks, or teachers. Chi-
nese and Japanese women immigrated to Hawaii, the continental United
States, and Canada. As the number of Asian immigrants on the Pacific Coast
increased, an exclusionary movement developed. The 1882 Chinese Exclu-
sion Act abruptly curtailed Chinese immigration; it would not be repealed
until 1943. The 1907 Gentlemen’s Agreement strictly limited Japanese immi-
gration. It did not exclude family members of residents, however, and there-
fore many Japanese women immigrated to the United States as “picture
brides.” In 1917, the ban on Chinese immigrants was extended to all Asian
countries.
Japanese women arriving at the Angel Island immigrant reception center in San Francisco Bay dur-
ing the 1920’s. Under the federal Cable Act of 1922, female immigrants could no longer automati-
cally assume the U.S . citizenship of their American husbands. (Smithsonian Institution)
696
Women immigrants
The Early Twentieth Century In the twentieth century, many female

immigrants continued to live under grim circumstances. Entering the labor
force at an unprecedented rate, they faced discrimination and grueling con-
ditions. Urban domestic service was managed by a network of unregulated
and exploitative city agencies. Rents were frequently inflated. The Chicago
Immigrant Protective League was founded in 1907 to help foreign-born arriv-
als find work, housing, and education. In New York City, new immigrants
found work in sweatshops, in which conditions ranged from unhealthy to
dangerous. In the winter of 1909, some women organized and voted to strike.
As a result, membership increased in the International Ladies’ Garment
Workers’ Unions. Demands were won in more than three hundred shops, and
some women succeeded in becoming union officials. Yet, improved factory
conditions were not sufficient to prevent a number of fires, including one
in 1911 at the Triangle Shirtwaist Company that killed 146 people, mostly
women. That same year, social scientist Francis Kellor described immigrants
as “the poorest protected of all humanity in this country . . . even worse than
children.”
Immigration during the first decade of the twentieth century exceeded by
thirty-five million the total of any previous decade. Nativistic sentiment
prompted Congress to enact new restrictions on immigration, including a lit-
eracy test (1917), a quota system (1921, 1924, and 1927), and the extension of
deportation criteria. The Great Depression provoked further exclusion, so
that total immigration for the decade of the 1930’s was lower than at any pre-
vious point since the 1820’s.
Post-World War II During World War II (1939-1945), issei (first-generation

Japanese immigrants) were interned with their families in camps by the U.S.
government. Following the war, the War Brides Act (1945) allowed Chinese,
Japanese, and European women to enter the United States as wives of service-
men. Similarly, during the 1960’s and 1970’s, such marriages were common
throughout Southeast Asia. In 1962, the Migration and Refugee Assistance
Act was passed to help Cubans resettle in the United States. By 1965, the ma-
jor source of immigration had shifted from Europe to Latin America and
Asia. The Immigration Act of 1965, which amended the Immigration and
Naturalization Act of 1952 abandoned national origins quotas and intro-
duced preference categories.
After 1976, no country could send more than 20,000 people in any one
year to the United States; the rule resulted in a higher proportion of blue-
collar immigration. The 1980 Refugee Act was introduced to deal with the
refugees from Indochina who were admitted following the end of hostilities
in Vietnam in 1975. During the 1970’s, a “mail-order bride” industry devel-
oped that enabled women from the Philippines, Thailand, and eastern Eu-
rope to immigrate to the United States.
In 1991, procedural guidelines for immigration screening were developed
by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. Canada developed
697
Women immigrants
gender-sensitive rules to make it easier for women to pass through the screen-
ing process. In 1992, in order to manage the immigration of refugees more
strictly, Canada introduced new restrictive laws.
During the 1990’s, women were as likely as men to immigrate to the United
States. Developing nations, such as Mexico and the Philippines, became the
primary source of immigration. In 1993, Mexico provided the largest number
of immigrants, including numerous undocumented women. As more Ameri-
can women sought employment out of the home, Central American women,
migrating in order to gain economic and social security, filled the need for
domestic help in cities. In 1993, The Chicago Review addressed the exploitation
of immigrant women: “To earn their living they perform the most varied jobs,
many of them menial and sub-human.”
Concern surfaced regarding immigrant beneficiaries of two welfare pro-
grams in the United States: Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)
and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). In 1993, 6.0 percent of the immi-
grant population were on public assistance, compared with 3.4 percent of all
citizens. Twenty-nine percent of all legal immigrants were living below the
poverty line. Since 70 percent of all Americans living below the poverty line
were female, it is probable that a high percentage of them were immigrant
women.
When women depart from their own cultures, they may lose their custom-
ary support systems. They have often left patriarchal and hierarchical tradi-
tions. In the United States, they enter a more egalitarian world with a more
open sexuality. Gender and family roles can be thrown into disequilibrium.
Domestic violence against immigrant women has increased, and there has
been a higher incidence of depression and substance abuse among these
women. Often eager to take advantage of opportunities, immigrant women
are more willing than men to accept any job that is offered, even working in
garment sweatshops. Women from different immigrant groups face many of
the same issues, but how they cope with these issues varies from one culture to
another.
Susan E. Hamilton
Further Reading
York: Olive Branch Press, 2005.
Agosin, Marjorie. Uncertain Travelers: Conversations with Jewish Women Immi-
grants to America. Edited by Mary G. Berg. Hanover, N.H.: University Press
of New England, 1999.
Neidle, Cecyle S. America’s Immigrant Women. Boston: Twayne, 1975.
Peffer, George Anthony. If They Don’t Bring Their Women Here: Chinese Female
Immigration Before Exclusion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999.
Strum, Philippa, and Danielle Tarantolo, eds. Women Immigrants in the United
States: Proceedings of a Conference Sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson International
698
Wong Kim Ark case
Center for Scholars and the Migration Policy Institute, September 9, 2002. Wash-
ington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2003.
See also Amerasians; Asian American women; Cable Act; Garment indus-
try; Hull-House; Indentured servitude; Mail-order brides; Page law; Picture
brides; Settlement house movement; Thai garment worker enslavement; Tri-
angle Shirtwaist Company fire; War brides.
Wong Kim Ark case

The Case: U.S. Supreme Court decision on legal status of children of immi-
grants who are born in the United States

and naturalization; Court cases
Significance: In this ruling the Supreme Court held that children born in
the United States, even to temporary sojourners, are subject to U.S. juris-
diction, regardless of their race or nationality.
After the Civil War, the Constitution of the United States was amended to deal
with the end of slavery and the legal status of the freed slaves. Under existing
law, notably the 1857 Dred Scott case (Dred Scott v. Sandford), even free African
Americans could not become citizens. The Thirteenth Amendment ended
slavery. The Fourteenth Amendment, which was drafted to confer citizenship
on the newly freed slaves and to protect their rights from infringement by
state governments, begins:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdic-
tion thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they re-
side.
The Fourteenth Amendment ended neither racial prejudice nor various

racially based legal discriminations. In 1882, 1884, and 1894, Congress passed
a series of laws known as the Chinese Exclusion Acts. These statutes were de-
signed to keep persons of Chinese ancestry out of the United States. They
were particularly aimed at the importation of Chinese laborers and at the
“coolie” system—a form of indentured labor. The acceptance of low wages by
imported Chinese immigrants angered many Americans.
Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco in 1873. His parents were Chi-
nese subjects permanently domiciled in the United States. In modern termi-
699
Wong Kim Ark case
nology, they would have been called “resident aliens.” They had been in busi-
ness in San Francisco and were neither employees nor diplomatic agents of
the government of China. In 1890 they returned to China after many years in
the United States. Wong Kim Ark also went to China in 1890, but he returned
to the United States the same year and was readmitted to the country on the
grounds that he was a U.S. citizen. In 1894 he again went to China for a tem-
porary visit but was denied readmission to the United States on his return in
August, 1895.
The government’s position was that under the Chinese Exclusion Acts, a
Chinese person born to alien parents who had not renounced his previous
nationality was not “born or naturalized in the United States” within the
meaning of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. If the gov-
ernment’s position was correct, Wong Kim Ark was not a citizen of the United
States and was not entitled to readmission to the country. Wong brought a ha-
beas corpus action against the government in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California. That court’s judgment in favor of Wong was
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by the government.
Justice Horace Gray wrote the Supreme Court’s opinion for a 6-2 majority.
Gray’s argument begins with the assumption that the citizenship clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment has to be read in the context of preexisting law. The
Court’s opinion begins with a long review of citizenship practices and legal
customs. The U.S. tradition had been to distinguish between “natural-born”
and naturalized citizens. This distinction came from English common law. In
England, for hundreds of years prior to the American Revolution, all persons
born within the king’s realms except the children of diplomats and alien ene-
mies were said to have been born under the king’s protection and were
natural-born subjects. This rule was applied or extended equally to the chil-
dren of alien parents. Moreover, the same rule was in force in all the English
colonies in North America prior to the revolution, and was continued (ex-
cept with regard to slaves) under the jurisdiction of the United States when it
became independent. The first American law concerning naturalization was
passed in the First Congress. It, and its successor acts, passed in 1802, as-
sumed the citizenship of all free persons born within the borders of the
United States. It was not until the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Acts that
any U.S. law had sought to alter the rule regarding natural-born citizens.
On the European continent, however, the law of citizenship was different.
Most other European countries had adopted the citizenship rules of ancient
Roman law. Under the Roman civil law, a child takes the nationality of his or
her parents. Indeed, when United States v. Wong Kim Ark reached the Supreme
Court, the government argued that the European practice had become the
true rule of international law as it was recognized by the great majority of the
countries of the world.
This was the historical and legal context for the Fourteenth Amendment’s
language “All persons born or naturalized in the United States. . . .” Accord-
ing to Justice Gray, the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to extend
700
Wong Kim Ark case
the rule providing citizenship for natural-born persons to the freed slaves
and their children. The amendment did not establish a congressional power
to alter the constitutional grant of citizenship. Gray’s opinion reviews many of
the Court’s prior opinions upholding the principle. The Chinese Exclusion
Acts, passed after the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, could not af-
fect the amendment’s meaning, according to the majority, and therefore did
not affect the established rule of natural-born citizenship.
The grant of constitutional power to Congress to “establish a uniform rule
of naturalization” did not validate the Chinese Exclusion Acts. Wong, as a
natural-born citizen, had no need of being naturalized. The Court held that
“Every person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no natural-
ization.” Moreover, the majority held that Congress’ power of naturalization
is “a power to confer citizenship, not to take it away.” In other words, Congress
had the power to establish uniform rules for naturalization but could not al-
ter the plain-language and common-law meaning of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment’s citizenship clause.
The dissenting justices saw the case differently. Chief Justice Melville
Fuller wrote an extensive dissent in which Justice John Marshall Harlan
joined. In their view, the common-law rule sprang from the feudal relation-
ship between the British crown and children born within the realm. Ameri-
can law was not bound to follow the common-law rule because there were dif-
ferences between “citizens” and “subjects.” In a republic such as the United
States, citizenship was a status created by and conferred by the civil law. Be-
cause nothing in U.S. law had explicitly endorsed the common-law principle
of citizenship, the Fourteenth Amendment did not have to be read so as to in-
clude it. Fuller argued that Congress is free to pass statutes that define and in-
terpret the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the dissent-
ers’ view, then, the Chinese Exclusion Acts could constitutionally limit the
reach of the phrase “born or naturalized in the United States and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof.” Under this interpretation, Wong Kim Ark would not
have been a citizen and his exclusion would have been constitutional. The
Court’s decision in this case was important because it stripped the govern-
ment of the power to deny the citizenship of persons born in the United
States of alien parents.
Robert Jacobs
Further Reading
ica, 1882-1943. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991. Good discus-
sion of the effects and technical aspects of the Chinese Exclusion Acts.
701
Xenophobia

McKenzie, Roderick Duncan. Oriental Exclusion: The Effect of American Immigra-
tion Laws, Regulations, and Judicial Decisions upon the Chinese and Japanese on
the American Pacific Coast, 1885-1940. New York: J. S. Ozer, 1971. Discusses
the human aspect of the Chinese exclusion laws.

Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclu-
sion cases; Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold
rush; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coo-
lies; Immigration Act of 1943; Migration; Page law; “Yellow peril” campaign.
Xenophobia
Definition: Irrational or exaggerated fear of foreigners
Immigration issues: Discrimination; Nativism and racism; Religion
Significance: Xenophobia and nativism gave birth to the eugenics move-

ment and influenced theories about which human characteristics are de-
sirable or undesirable, and these unscientific theories have been cited as
justifications for restricting immigration from some parts of the world.
Members of premodern (traditional) societies often exhibit distrust and fear

of any persons not immediately known to them. Social scientists call this un-
reasoning and seemingly instinctual fear of strangers “xenophobia.” Xeno-
phobia manifests itself in modern societies among members of subcultures,
religious sects, ethnic groups, and political movements. Because people of
similar beliefs and cultural backgrounds often tend to associate largely with
one another, they develop little understanding of people with different be-
liefs and cultural backgrounds. As a result, in a pluralistic society such as the
United States, xenophobia develops between Jews and Christians, between
African Americans and European Americans, and between the members of
many other groups that have limited interaction with people with back-
grounds different from theirs.
702
Xenophobia
Often xenophobia leads directly to ethnocentrism, a conviction that one’s

own group and its culture are superior to all other groups and their cultures.
Xenophobia and ethnocentrism form essential elements of “nativism.” Soci-
ologists include nativist movements as part of a larger category called “revital-
ization movements.” Revitalization movements usually occur within societies
or groups that have suffered stress and whose cultures have suffered disorga-
nization. Such movements aim to better the lives of their members, often at
the expense of the members of other groups. Modern examples include the
African American separatist movement in the United States, the Nazi move-
ment in Germany during the period between the world wars, the Branch
Davidian religious sect of the late twentieth century, the Indian Ghost Dance
movement in the western United States during the last quarter of the nine-
teenth century, and many others. Several nativist movements, fueled by xeno-
phobia, have actively advocated the use of eugenics to revitalize their own cul-
ture by eliminating foreign traits from their memberships.
Eugenics Eugenics is a branch of science that deals with the improvement

of the hereditary qualities of human beings through controlled or selective
breeding. Eugenicists argue that many undesirable human characteristics
(for example, inherited diseases such as hemophilia and Down syndrome)
can be eliminated through careful genetic screening of couples planning to
marry. Moderate eugenicists advocate the creation of a central data bank of
genetic records for entire populations. A person contemplating marriage
would be able to investigate the genetic endowment of his or her chosen part-
ner to ascertain whether that person had a genetic weakness.
More radical eugenicists argue that governments should take a direct
hand in racial improvement by passing laws forbidding genetically flawed in-
dividuals from reproducing. Others hold that genetically flawed individuals
should be medically sterilized. Eugenicists justify their positions on economic
and scientific grounds: They maintain that the human race cannot spare
scarce resources to tend to those born with genetic handicaps and that peo-
ple must somehow compensate for the retrogressive evolutionary effects of
modern technology.
According to many eugenicists, the cost of keeping genetic defectives alive
through the use of modern medical technology will eventually bankrupt
world society. These eugenicists also believe that if genetically unsound men
and women are allowed to breed uncontrollably, all of humanity will eventu-
ally inherit their debilitating characteristics. Before the rise of modern indus-
trial society and the development of medical science, genetically defective
individuals rarely lived long enough to reproduce, which controlled their
negative influences on the human gene pool. Today, society not only expends
increasingly scarce medical care on these people but also allows them to per-
petuate and to spread their genes. The only way to reverse this retrogressive
evolution, say the eugenicists, is to control or prevent the reproduction of
that part of the world’s population that carries dysfunctional genes.
703
Xenophobia
The debate concerning eugenics has taken on a greater urgency with the
recent strides that have been made in genetic engineering, particularly clon-
ing. This new technology may make possible not only the medical elimina-
tion of genetic defects but also the “engineering” of desirable characteristics.
It is apparently possible that genetic engineers may in a few decades be able
to increase the intelligence of future generations (or decrease it). They may
also be able to ensure that progeny will be tall (or short) or fair complected
(or dark), to determine their hair color, and even to determine their sex. For
some people, these possibilities presage a brilliant future. For others, they
conjure up frightening images of an Orwellian nightmare. In either case, eth-
ical questions are profound and complex.
Consequences The instances in which governments or societies have im-

plemented eugenics principles have not inspired confidence that eugenics
goals will ever be achieved. They have not only failed to eliminate undesirable
characteristics in the populations on which they were tested but also, in virtu-
ally every instance, have resulted in abuses that are indefensible in any moral
court. Those who have controlled eugenics programs have been influenced
in the passage and implementation of eugenic laws by xenophobia, nativism,
and outright racism, rather than by sound scientific principles.
The leading spokesperson for the eugenics movement in the United States
for many years was Charles B. Davenport. Davenport taught zoology and biol-
ogy at Harvard University and the University of Chicago during the late nine-
teenth and early twentieth centuries. Like many scientists of his era, Daven-
port assumed that each “race” had its own characteristics. Davenport led a
grassroots nativist movement in the United States that eventually succeeded
in passing eugenics laws at both the national and state levels. The Immigra-
tion Act passed by large majorities in both houses of the U.S. Congress in
1924 governed who could immigrate to the United States from abroad. Its
language made immigration from northern Europe relatively easy, while resi-
dents of Africa and Asia found themselves virtually excluded. As several of its
supporters (including future president Calvin Coolidge) acknowledged, the
Immigration Act was designed to prevent the decline of the “Nordic” race by
limiting the influx of members of “inferior” races.
Scientists in Germany, especially anthropologists and psychiatrists, began
advocating eugenics legislation before the beginning of the twentieth cen-
tury. Eugenics seemed to offer scientific validation for the racial theories of
Adolf Hitler and other Nazi leaders (theories based not on scientific evidence
but on xenophobia and nativism).
Shortly after the outbreak of World War II, German doctors and directors
of medical institutions—apparently authorized by Hitler—began the so-
called euthanasia program. In mental institutions, hospitals, and institutions
for the chronically ill, doctors began to kill (by neglect, by lethal injection,
and by poisonous gas) those persons judged to be “useless eaters.” Although
it was supposedly terminated after 1941, the program resulted in the deaths
704
Xenophobia
German dictator Adolf Hitler (holding hat) and Italian dictator Benito Mussolini inspecting troops
during Hitler’s visit to Italy. Hitler and Mussolini both came to power on the strength of their fascist
principles, which were strongly xenophobic. (Library of Congress)
of many thousands of people. Some of the personnel involved in the euthana-

sia program formed the nucleus of the units that carried out the legalized
murder of enormous numbers of people in Nazi concentration camps in Po-
land from 1942 to 1945. Most of the victims were members of races deemed
“inferior” by Nazi ideologists: Jews, Gypsies, and Slavs. It is little wonder that
many people are fearful of the policies advocated by contemporary eugeni-
cists.
Beginning during the 1930’s, the affinity between Nazi racial theories and
eugenics caused most biological and medical scientists around the world to
renounce eugenics policies and experiments. The information about the
concentration camps that became known at the many war crimes trials held
after 1945 seemed to have dealt a death blow to eugenicist dreams of a per-
fected human race. By the mid-1950’s, eugenics societies around the world
were seemingly bereft of members and influence. Nevertheless, an increasing
number of physicians began to recognize the many possible benefits of con-
tinued genetic research.
By the 1970’s, genetic researchers had shown conclusively that some eth-
nic and racial groups were especially susceptible to certain genetic disorders.
African Americans are particularly prone to the single-gene disorder called
sickle-cell anemia, Ashkenazic Jews to Tay-Sachs disease, and Americans whose
ancestors came from the Mediterranean area to Cooley’s anemia. The new
eugenics/genetics societies in the United States led a movement that resulted
705
Xenophobia
in the National Genetic Diseases Act of 1976, which funded research into the
detection and treatment of genetic disorders. A number of states extended
their postnatal screening programs to include many single-gene disorders.
Doctors developed a medical procedure known as amniocentesis, which al-
lowed them to identify genetic and chromosomal disorders during the early
stages of pregnancy. If an unborn fetus was identified as genetically flawed,
parents could elect abortion.
During the 1970’s, eugenicists also turned their attention to the popula-
tion explosion. They found increasing cause for alarm because most of the
human population increase was occurring in the Third World (Africa, Asia,
and Latin America) and among the bottom socioeconomic strata of industri-
alized nations. Fearing for the quality of the human gene pool, many eugen-
ics groups began to advocate and finance “family planning” programs in the
Third World and among domestic socially disadvantaged populations. These
new programs clearly indicate that the nativism and xenophobia that influ-
enced earlier generations of eugenicists are still operative.
Paul Madden
Further Reading
1975. Traces the origins of anti-immigrant movements in America, relating
the xenophobic tradition to the exclusionist laws and practices of the in-
clusive period.
Davenport, Charles Benedict. Heredity in Relation to Eugenics. New York: Holt,
1911. Despite its age, this study is still valuable in understanding the argu-
ments of early eugenicists.
history from the mid-eighteenth century to the early twenty-first century.
Provides an emphasis on cultural and social trends, with attention to eth-
Graham, Loren R. Between Science and Values. New York: Columbia University
Press, 1981. Thoughtful and provocative exploration of the moral and eth-
ical issues raised by genetic engineering; Graham is critical of the old eu-
genics and of the xenophobia and ethnocentrism upon which it was based.
New York: Atheneum, 1963. Study showing how nativism was given a mea-
sure of scientific legitimacy by the eugenics movement.
Kevles, Daniel J. In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985. Study clearly demonstrating the influ-
ence of nativism, xenophobia, and outright racism on the leading eugeni-
cists.
Muller-Hill, Benno. Murderous Science: Elimination by Scientific Selection of Jews,
Gypsies, and Others—Germany, 1933-1945. Translated by George R. Fraser.
706
“Yellow peril” campaign
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1988. Establishes the relation-

ship between the eugenics movement in Germany and both the euthanasia
program and the mass murder in concentration camps.
See also Alien and Sedition Acts; Assimilation theories; Cuban refugee
policy; Cultural pluralism; English-only and official English movements; His-
tory of U.S. immigration; Immigration Act of 1921; Japanese segregation in
California schools; Mongrelization; Nativism; Palmer raids; Sacco and Van-
zetti trial.

The Event: Anti-Asian immigration nativist campaign
Date: 1890’s-early twentieth century
Place: West Coast

tion; Japanese immigrants; Nativism and racism
Significance: The San Francisco Bulletin’s “yellow peril” campaign against

Japanese immigrants strengthened anti-Asian feeling in the United States
and strained relations between the U.S. and Japanese governments.
In 1890, only about two thousand Japanese people were living in North Amer-
ica. They worked mainly as laborers and farmhands in California and the Pa-
cific Northwest. Despite their minuscule numbers, the use of Japanese to
break a labor strike in the coal mines in British Columbia began what was to
become a widespread anti-Japanese campaign.
Typical of the political rhetoric that was to become prevalent was a cam-
paign slogan used in 1887 by Dr. O’Donnell of San Francisco: “Japs must go.”
Although the slogan had little effect on O’Donnell’s failed political cam-
paign, it was a sign of things to come.
In 1889, the editor of the San Francisco Bulletin began a series of editorials
attacking Japanese immigrants and making a case that they were dangerous
to white American workers and to American culture. On May 4, 1892, he
wrote:
It is now some three years ago that the Bulletin first called attention to the influx
of Japanese into this state, and stated that in time their immigration threatened
to rival that of the Chinese, with dire disaster to laboring interests in California.
The San Francisco Bulletin’s yellow peril campaign helped strengthen the
growing anti-Japanese fervor in California. The campaign was not only against
707
This turn-of-the-twentieth-century toy gun bears the message, “Chinese

must go.” When its trigger is pulled, the figure in the hat kicks the Chi-
nese figure. (Asian American Studies Library, University of California
at Berkeley)
Japanese laborers, who they claimed threatened “real” American workers, but
also against their perceived threat to American culture. Met with hostility,
prejudice, and discrimination, Japanese in many urban areas settled into eth-
nic enclaves known as Little Tokyos, where they could feel safe and comfort-
able among fellow compatriots and secure employment.
Effects On June 14, 1893, the San Francisco Board of Education passed a
resolution requiring all Japanese students to attend the already segregated
Chinese school instead of the regular public schools. Because of Japanese
protests, the resolution was rescinded; however, it marked the beginning of
legal discrimination against the Japanese in California. In 1894, a treaty be-
tween the United States and Japan allowed citizens open immigration, but
both governments were given powers to limit excessive immigration. In 1900,
because of American protests, Japan began a voluntary program to limit Japa-
nese emigration to the United States.
The Alaska gold rush of 1897-1899 attracted a great number of white labor-
ers, and when the Northern Pacific and Great Northern Railroads worked to
build a connecting line from Tacoma and Seattle to the East, extra laborers
were needed. The companies turned to Japanese immigrants as workers.
708
Some of these laborers came from Japan and Hawaii. The rapid influx of Japa-
nese laborers created further anti-Asian sentiments and hostility. With the
1882 Chinese Exclusion Act up for renewal in 1902, the anti-Japanese senti-
ment occurred in the overall context of a growing anti-Asian movement, es-
pecially among labor unions and various political groups.
In April of 1900, the San Francisco Building Trades Council passed a reso-
lution to support the renewal of the Chinese Exclusion Act and to add the
Japanese to this act to “secure this Coast against any further Japanese immi-
gration, and thus forever settle the mooted Mongolian labor problem.” The
county Republican Party lobbied extensively to get the national Republican
Party to adopt a Japanese exclusion plank in their national platform. San
Francisco mayor James Phelan and California governor Henry Gage joined
the calls for Japanese to be included in the renewal of the Exclusion Act.
However, when the exclusion law was extended in 1902, Japanese people
were not included.
After the 1905 defeat of Russia by Japan in the Russo-Japanese War, a grow-
ing fear of Japanese power led to further agitation and political tactics to limit
Japanese immigration and in-
fluence in America. Whereas
Chinese people were hated and
despised by various politicians,
labor leaders, and some regular
citizens, Japanese people were
feared. In 1905, the San Fran-
cisco Chronicle launched another
anti-Japanese campaign, empha-
sizing the dangers of future im-
migration. Later, the San Fran-
cisco Labor Council, at the
urging of A. E. Ross and with the
support of San Francisco mayor
Eugene Schmitz, launched boy-
cotts against Japanese merchants
and white merchants who em-
ployed Japanese workers. Later
that year, sixty-seven labor orga-
nizations formed the Asiatic Ex-
clusion League (originally called
the Japanese and Korean Exclu-
This turn-of-the-twentieth-century advertisement for rat
sion League), and the Ameri-
poison carried a double message: It used the nega-
can Federation of Labor passed tive stereotype of a Chinese “coolie” eating rats to
a resolution that the provisions make its point about the effectiveness of the product,
of the Chinese Exclusion Act be while pointing a finger at the Chinese figure next to
extended to include Japanese the words, “They must go!” (Asian American Studies Li-
and Koreans. brary, University of California at Berkeley)
709
In 1906, anti-Asian sentiments continued to grow. San Francisco was struck

by a major earthquake in April, and civil unrest increased. Japanese persons
and businesses were attacked and looted. On October 11, 1906, the San Fran-
cisco School Board ordered that all Japanese, Korean, and Chinese students
attend a segregated “Oriental school.” (This regulation was later changed to
include only older students and those with limited English proficiency.) Ja-
pan protested that the school board’s action violated the U.S.-Japan treaty of
1894, bringing the San Francisco situation into international focus.
The Gentlemen’s Agreement To assuage Japan, President Theodore Roo-

sevelt arranged with the school board to rescind its order in exchange for fed-
eral action to limit immigration from Japan. In the ensuing U.S.-Japan “Gen-
tlemen’s Agreement,” Japan promised not to issue passports to laborers
planning to settle in the United States and recognized U.S. rights to refuse
Japanese immigrants entry into the United States. In an executive order is-
sued on March 14, 1907, Roosevelt implemented an amendment to the Immi-
gration Act of 1907, which allowed the United States to bar entry of any immi-
grant whose passport was not issued for direct entry into the United States
and whose immigration was judged to threaten domestic labor conditions.
Subsequent California legislation, the Heney-Webb bill or Alien Land Law
of 1913, attempted to limit Asian interests within the state by prohibiting
Asians from owning property. Although anti-Japanese sentiments lessened
during World War I after Japan joined the Allies in the war against Germany,
almost immediately following the war these sentiments resurfaced. The 1917
and 1924 Immigration Acts barred Asian laborers from the United States. In
California, a campaign to pass the 1920 Alien Land Law attracted the support
of the American Legion and the Native Sons and Daughters of the Golden
West.
In an effort to avoid widespread prejudice and discrimination, the Japa-
nese American Citizens League (JACL), founded in 1930 and consisting of
second-generation Japanese Americans (nisei), sought to follow a path of
economic success through individual efforts, the cultivation of friendship
and understanding between themselves and other Americans, and assimila-
tion into American culture. During the 1930’s and 1940’s, nisei were urged by
JACL leaders to prove their worth as patriotic Americans by contributing to
the economic and social welfare of the United States and to the social life of
the nation by living with other citizens in a common community. Their efforts
would find a new obstacle in 1941, however, when President Franklin D. Roo-
sevelt issued Executive Order 9066 allowing internment of Japanese Ameri-
cans in segregated camps.
Gregory A. Levitt
Further Reading
710
ZADVYDAS V. DAVIS
history from the mid-eighteenth century to the early twenty-first century.

Provides an emphasis on cultural and social trends, with attention to eth-
Ichihashi, Yamato. The American Immigration Collection: Japanese in the United
States. 1932. Reprint. New York: Arno Press, 1969. Thorough description of
Japanese immigration into the United States with an excellent chapter on
anti-Japanese agitation.
McWilliams, Carey. Prejudice: Japanese-Americans, Symbol of Racial Intolerance. Bos-
ton: Little, Brown, 1944. A dated but excellent account of anti-Japanese
American prejudice and discrimination up to World War II.
Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. An excellent overview of the broader picture
of Asian immigration and settlement in the United States.
Wilson, Robert A., and Bill Hosokawa. East to America: A History of the Japanese
in the United States. New York: William Morrow, 1980. An excellent account
of Japanese immigration and settlement in the United States.

Chinese American Citizens Alliance; Chinese Exclusion Act; Chinese exclu-
sion cases; Chinese immigrants; Chinese immigrants and California’s gold
rush; Chinese immigrants and family customs; Chinese Six Companies; Coo-
lies; Immigration Act of 1943; Migration; Page law; Wong Kim Ark case.
ZADVYDAS V. DAVIS
The Case: U.S. Supreme Court ruling on detention and deportation of aliens
Date: June 28, 2001
Immigration issues: Civil rights and liberties; Court cases
Significance: In a decision that would have an immediate impact on thou-

sands of people, the Supreme Court ruled that the government may not
detain deportable aliens indefinitely simply because no other country is
willing to accept them.
Kestutis Zadvydas, a person of Lithuanian ancestry, was born in a displaced

persons camp in Germany and entered the United States as a child. After he
711
ZADVYDAS V. DAVIS
built a long criminal record, the Immigration and Naturalization Service

(INS) ordered him to be deported to his country of citizenship. However,
both Lithuania and Germany rejected his citizenship claims and refused to
accept him. After being detained by the U.S. government for more than five
years, Zadvydas claimed that the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment
prohibited the INS from indefinitely detaining him without condemnation in
a criminal trial. The INS justified the detention by reference to an interpreta-
tion of a 1996 federal statute. A federal appeals court refused to exercise judi-
cial review over the immigration policies of the legislative and executive
branches.
By a 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court repudiated the idea of allowing the
INS unlimited discretion for detaining Zadvydas and others in similar circum-
stances. Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen G. Breyer emphasized that
the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment put “important constitutional
limitations” on legislative and executive policies toward all persons who had
entered the country, even if they were in the country illegally. After a “reason-
able” period of six months, if deportation appeared unlikely in the foresee-
able future, he wrote that the INS had the burden of showing an adequate
reason for keeping the person in custody. He observed that preventive deten-
tion would be appropriate when there was sufficient evidence that a person
was dangerous to society.
Thomas Tandy Lewis
Further Reading
Blake, Nicholas J., and Raza Husain. Immigration, Asylum and Human Rights.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
wood Press, 1999.
See also Chinese detentions in New York; Deportation; Haitian immi-

grants; Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy; Immigration and Natu-
ralization Service; Naturalization; September 11 terrorist attacks.
712
Appendices
Bibliography
General Studies
Barkan, Elliott R. And Still They Come: Immigrants and American Society, 1920 to
the 1990’s. Wheeling, Ill.: Harlan Davidson, 1996. Looks at the changing
composition of the immigrant population during the twentieth century
and considers the impact of immigrants on American society.
Bodnar, John. The Transplanted: A History of Immigrants in Urban America. Bloom-
ington: Indiana University Press, 1985. A look at how immigrants adjusted
to American society that considers the situations immigrants faced in their
homelands and how they drew on their homeland traditions in adjusting
to life in the new country. Looks primarily at European immigrants but
also Chinese, Japanese, and Mexicans.
American Life. 2d ed. New York: HarperCollins, 2002. An excellent general
treatment of immigration history. Looks at the motives and experiences of
immigrants from 1500 to the end of the twentieth century and considers
major issues relating to immigration.
Glazer, Nathan, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Beyond the Melting Pot: The Ne-
groes, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City. 2d ed. Cam-
bridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1970. A classic study of the identifications and
inter-group relations of American ethnic and immigrant groups.
Kennedy, John F. A Nation of Immigrants. Norwalk, Conn.: Easton Press, 1991.
A new edition of President Kennedy’s classic 1958 book calling for an end
to discrimination in immigration laws. Kennedy’s championing of the
change in immigration laws helped to lead to the historic 1965 shift in im-
migration policy.
Takaki, Ronald. A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America. Boston:
Little, Brown, 1993. A history of the United States from the perspective of
its ethnic groups. Tends to emphasize non-white, non-European groups
and their experiences with racism.
Post-1965 Immigrants
Hamamoto, Darrell Y., and Rodolfo D. Torres, eds. New American Destinies: A
Reader in Contemporary Asian and Latino Immigration. New York: Routledge,
1997. Essays cover U.S. immigration history, labor force participation
among immigrants, new theoretical frameworks for studying immigra-
tion, various lived experiences among these immigrant populations, and
community-building.
Millman, Joel. The Other Americans: How Immigrants Renew Our Country, Our
Economy, and Our Values. New York: Penguin Books, 1997. The author, a
journalist, takes an anecdotal approach to recounting the lives of contem-
porary American immigrants. He argues that immigrants are re-building
the American economy and reclaiming lost neighborhoods.
715
Bibliography
Portes, Alejandro, and Rubén G. Rumbaut. Immigrant America: A Portrait.

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. A description of the nature
and variety of immigrant settlement in the United States in the late twenti-
eth century. Offers an optimistic view of the role of immigrants in Ameri-
can life.
Reimers, David M. Still the Golden Door: The Third World Comes to America. 2d ed.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1992. An excellent history of late
twentieth century immigration to the U.S. This second edition includes a
detailed discussion of the 1990 Immigration Act, an evenhanded examina-
tion of issues connected to undocumented or illegal immigration, and
consideration of the new immigrants arriving from areas in and around
the former Soviet Union in the early 1990’s.
Rosenzweig, Mark R., and Guillermina Jasso. The New Chosen People: Immi-
grants in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1990. Slightly
dated now, but a good introduction to the post-1965 immigrants and the is-
sues facing them.
Ueda, Reed. Postwar Immigrant America: A Social History. Boston: Bedford
Books of St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Begins by looking at the legacy of the re-
strictive immigration policy of the United States, then describes the trans-
formation of American immigration policy to a worldwide one in 1952 and
1965. Provides a good section on the changing face of immigration as a re-
sult of post-1965 immigration policy. Considers America as a world melting
pot. In the last chapter, the author is somewhat critical of the rise of ethnic
identity politics.
Immigration Policy, Law, and Theoretical Issues

Borjas, George. Heaven’s Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999. An examination of the
economic effects of immigration. Borjas finds that immigrants contribute
to the American economy, but that the large numbers of low-skilled work-
ers tend to intensify economic inequality in the United States and harm
lower-paid native born workers.
grants Since 1882. New York: Hill & Wang, 2004. A detailed history of Amer-
ican immigration policy since the late nineteenth century.
Hing, Bill Ong. Defining America Through Immigration Policy. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press, 2004. A broad survey of federal immigration poli-
cies and their impact on the social structure of the United States.
Hirschman, Charles, Philip Kasinitz, and Josh DeWind, eds. The Handbook of
International Migration: The American Experience. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 1999. A comprehensive compilation of research and thinking
on American immigration. The authors of the various chapters look at the-
ories of international migration and at how immigrant groups change in
the United States. They consider the social, economic, and political conse-
quences of immigration.
716
Bibliography
Assimilation and Adaptation of Immigrants

Gordon, Milton M. Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1966. The classic work on immigrant adaptation, written before the
great wave of immigration following the 1965 change in immigration law.
Gordon argues that immigrant groups tend to follow stages of assimilation,
beginning with acculturation and ending with marital assimilation.
Light, Ivan, and Parminder Bhachu, eds. Immigration and Entrepreneurship:
Culture, Capital, and Ethnic Networks. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Pub-
lishers, 1993. A study of how culture and ethnic networks together can
channel immigrants into small business ownership.
Portes, Alejandro, ed. The New Second Generation. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 1996. A selection of topical essays that examine the main chal-
lenges facing the children of immigrants.
Rumbaut, Rubén, and Alejandro Portes, eds. Ethnicities: Children of Immigrants
in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. The authors of
the chapters in this book look at the patterns of adaptation of children of
specific immigrant groups in the United States in the late twentieth and
early twenty-first century. The research collected here is based on the
Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study.
Suárez-Orozco, Carola, and Marcelo M. Suárez-Orozco. Children of Immigra-
tion. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002. Written by the co-
directors of the Harvard Immigration Project, the book examines how im-
migrant children and children of immigrants are faring in the United
States. It gives particular attention to their special needs as students and to
how American schools are addressing these special needs.
The Debate over Modern Immigration

Beck, Roy. The Case Against Immigration: The Moral, Economic, Social, and Environ-
mental Reasons for Reducing U.S. Immigration Back to Traditional Levels. New
York: W. W. Norton, 1996. Beck is an environmental and population control
activist who makes a case for drastically reducing immigration in this book.
Briggs, Vernon M. Mass Immigration and the National Interest. Armonk, N.Y.:
M. E. Sharpe, 1992. The author, an economist, argues that nineteenth and
early twentieth century immigration aided the U.S. economy but the post-
1965 immigration does not.
Brimelow, Peter. Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disas-
ter. New York: Random House, 1996. A controversial argument for drasti-
cally cutting back immigration that maintains the large numbers of immi-
grants arriving from non-European societies cannot be easily assimilated
into American culture.
Camarota, Steven. Importing Poverty: Immigration’s Impact on the Size and Growth
of the Poor Population in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Center for Immi-
gration Studies, 1999. Looks at the composition of the poor population in
1979, 1989, and 1997 in order to suggest how immigration affected the
growth of the poor population in the United States.
717
Bibliography
Heer, David. Immigration in America’s Future: Social Science Findings and the Pol-
icy Debate. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1996. An evenhanded presenta-
tion of social scientific research on the impact of immigration on Ameri-
can life. The author presents and interprets data on trends in immigration
and asks readers to decide the policy implications for themselves.
Perea, Juan, ed. Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Im-
pulse in the United States. New York: New York University Press, 1997. A col-
lection of essays that attack laws, policies, and popular movements seen as
anti-immigrant. The essays have the common thread of suggesting that all
efforts to limit immigration are reflections of a latent nativism.
Reimers, David M. Unwelcome Strangers: American Identity and the Turn Against
Immigration. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. Traces the history
of American attitudes toward immigration. The author questions the ma-
jor arguments against immigration, while suggesting that there are also
difficulties with simply assuming that the United States can continually ab-
sorb large numbers of immigrants.
Nativism in American History

Bennett, David H. The Party of Fear: From Nativist Movements to the New Far Right
in American History. 2d ed. New York: Vintage Books, 1995. A comprehen-
sive history of anti-immigrant movements in American history that argues
those opposed to immigrants have been dedicated to protecting the na-
tion against what they saw as alien ideas and people. He maintains that af-
ter 1919, fear of aliens shifted from fear of the foreigners themselves to
fear of foreign ideologies, particularly communism.
Billington, Ray Allen. The Protestant Crusade, 1800-1860: A Study of the Origins of
American Nativism. New York: Macmillan, 1938. A classic study of nativism
that helped bring the topic into the mainstream of historical work. As the ti-
tle indicates, Billington places a great deal of emphasis on anti-Catholicism
in American nativism.
New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1992. A study of the inter-
connected forces of nationalism and ethnic prejudice in American life
during the great wave of migration at the turn of the nineteenth and twen-
tieth centuries.
Migration, Gender, and Family Issues

Abel, Emily K., and Marjorie Pearson, eds. Across Cultures: The Spectrum of
Women’s Lives. New York: Gordon and Breach, 1989. Gender issues across
cultures are addressed in this anthology. In terms of migration, Carole H.
Browner and Dixie L. King discuss “Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Women
and Immigration.”
DiQuinzio, Patrice, and Iris Marion Young, eds. Feminist Ethics and Social Pol-
icy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997. Chapters address social
policy from a feminist perspective. Immigration law is of particular impor-
718
Bibliography
tance in Uma Narayan’s chapter, “‘Male-Order’ Brides: Immigrant Women,

Domestic Violence, and Immigration Law.”
Ehrenreich, Barbara, and Arlie Russell Hochschild, eds. Global Woman: Nan-
nies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy. New York: Metropolitan
Books, 2003. While some chapters address migration patterns from the
“global south” or developing countries to the developed locale of the U.S.,
migration flows throughout the world are addressed throughout the book.
In particular, the gendered dynamics of migration are well-illustrated by
all of the contributions. Further, an analysis of transnational flows of love
and support offer a unique perspective on the “emotional labor” of women
migrant workers.
Gabaccia, Donna R., ed. Seeking Common Ground: Multidisciplinary Studies of Im-
migrant Women in the United States. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1992. This an-
thology provides analyses of U.S. immigration and women immigrants
from a feminist perspective.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierrette, ed. Gender and U.S. Immigration: Contemporary
Trends. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. The editor points
out that gender is an important aspect of migration and shapes migration
patterns, but that gender has received relatively little attention in migra-
tion studies. Hondagneu-Sotelo brings together some of the best work in
this area.
Huang, Fung-Yea. Asian and Hispanic Immigrant Women in the Work Force: Impli-
cations of the United States Immigration Policies Since 1965. New York: Garland,
1997. Using data from the Current Population Survey, Huang highlights
the similarities and differences between two immigrant groups of women,
Asian and Hispanic, and the differences between women who entered the
U.S. with husbands versus those who entered independently.
Kelson, Gregory A., and Debra L. DeLaet, eds. Gender and Immigration. Lon-
don: Macmillan Press, 1998. Beginning with an analysis of the invisibility of
women in international migration scholarship, contributions to this an-
thology address issues ranging from immigration policy and gender rela-
tions to gender, marriage patterns, and sexuality among immigrants.
Luibhéld, Eithne, and Lionel Cantú, eds. Queer Migrations: Sexuality, U.S. Citi-
zenship, and Border Crossings. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
2005. This book provides a novel perspective on migration as the editors
bring together research on sexual orientation and U.S. immigration.
Immigrants and Literature

Fine, David M. The City, the Immigrant, and American Fiction, 1880-1920. Me-
tuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1977. This book is one of the best studies of
American immigrant fiction in the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries. It places this writing in the context of American immigration
history.
Mendoza, Louis G., and Subramanian Shankar, eds. Crossing Into America: The
New Literature of Immigration. New York: New Press, 2003. A collection of lit-
719
Bibliography
erature, diary entries, and letters that map the “great second wave” of
American immigration. Young, new writers along with authors such as Ja-
maica Kincaid, Maxine Hong Kingston, and Richard Rodriguez discuss the
many varied experiences of new immigrants to America.
Muller, Gilbert H. New Strangers in Paradise: The Immigrant Experience and Con-
temporary American Fiction. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1999.
Explores the immigrant experiences and emerging identities of Holocaust
survivors, Chicanos, Latinos from the Caribbean, African-Caribbean immi-
grants, and Asian Americans through their contemporary fiction.
African Americans and New African Immigrants

Berlin, Ira. Generations of Captivity: A History of African American Slaves. Cam-
bridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003. Looks at
the history of slaves in America, beginning with the first involuntary immi-
grant generations, which Berlin calls the Charter Generations. Empha-
sizes regional variations in the character of slavery.
_______. Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North Amer-
ica. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998.
Probably the most authoritative work on black slavery in North America.
Conniff, Michael L., and Thomas J. Davis. Africans in the Americas: A History of
the Black Diaspora. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Takes a comparative
approach to the history of involuntary African immigrants and their de-
scendants in the Caribbean, Brazil, Spanish America, and North America.
Curtin, Philip D. The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census. Madison: University of Wis-
consin Press, 1969. A classic and fundamental source of information on
numbers of slaves, mortality rates, and living conditions during the slave
trade.
Kasinitz, Philip. Caribbean New York: Black Immigrants and the Politics of Race.
Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1992. The author, a prominent soci-
ologist specializing in immigration, compares the experiences of pre-1965
West Indian immigrants to those who came after 1965 and argues that the
status and power of Caribbean immigrants decreased as African Americans
became more politically involved in the years after the Civil Rights move-
ment.
Asian Americans
Chang, Iris. The Chinese in America: A Narrative History. New York: Viking, 2003.
A well-written history of Chinese Americans that looks forward to their
possible future definitions of racial identity.
Fadiman, Anne. The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down. New York: Farrar,
Straus and Giroux, 1997. A case study of a Hmong child in the United
States who suffered a seizure. The book gives insight into the traditional
shamanistic beliefs of Hmong refugees in the U.S. and how these contrast
with American views of health and the world.
Freeman, James A. Hearts of Sorrow: Vietnamese American Lives. Stanford, Calif.:
720
Bibliography
Stanford University Press, 1989. The story of fourteen Vietnamese refu-

gees and their struggles to adapt to life in the United States.
Min, Pyong Gap, ed. Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues. 2d ed.
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press, 2005. A broad overview of the
Asian American experience that provides chapters on issues relevant to
Asian Americans and descriptions of individual Asian ethnic groups. Also
includes eight photo essays. This is an essential work for anyone interested
in contemporary Asian Americans.
Spickard, Paul R. Japanese Americans: The Formation and Transformations of an
Ethnic Group New York: Twayne, 1996. Tells the history of Japanese Ameri-
cans, beginning with those who arrived between 1890 and 1910 and con-
tinuing on to new Japanese immigrants arriving in the late twentieth cen-
tury.
Zhou, Min, and Carl L. Bankston III. Growing Up American: How Vietnamese
Children Adapt to Life in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Founda-
tion, 1998. Combines a general discussion of Vietnamese American refu-
gees with a case study of Vietnamese children in a particular community.
European Groups
Bailyn, Bernard. From Protestant Peasants to Jewish Intellectuals: The Germans in
the Peopling of America. Oxford, England: Berg, 1988. A history of the differ-
ent waves of immigration of one of the largest ethnic groups in America.
ican Experience. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993. Although it deals with
Italian Americans throughout American history, the central part of this
book concerns the mass immigration of Italians between 1880 and 1924.
Miller, Kerby A., and Patricia Mulholland Miller. Journey of Hope: The Story of
Irish Immigration to America. New York: Chronicle Books, 2001. A history of
Irish Americans that presents their time in America as a triumphant suc-
cess story.
Thomas, William I., and Florian Znaniecki. The Polish Peasant in Europe and
America: A Classic Work in Immigration History. Edited by Eli Zaretsky. Ur-
bana: University of Illinois Press, 1996. A new, abridged edition of a 1927
sociological study. The book is very important in the social scientific study
of immigration, as well as a good introduction to Polish American settle-
ment.
Latinos
Davis, Mike. Magical Urbanism: Latinos Reinvent the US Big City. New York:
Verso, 2000. Looks at how Latinos, as the fastest growing and perhaps larg-
est segment in American society, are transforming American urban life.
Galarza, Ernesto. Merchants of Labor: The Mexican Bracero Story. Santa Barbara,
Calif.: McNally and Loftin, West, 1978. A history of the Bracero program
that describes the treatment of Mexican laborers and the impact of the
program.
721
Bibliography
Massey, Douglas S., Rafael Alarcon, Jorge Durand, and Humberto González.
Return to Aztlan: The Social Process of International Migration from Western Mex-
ico. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. Combines historical, an-
thropological, and survey data to study migration to the United States
from four communities in Mexico.
Portes, Alejandro, and Robert L. Bach. Latin Journey: Cuban and Mexican Immi-
grants in the United States. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. A
key work on Latin American immigration, contrasting two important but
very distinctive groups.
Sanchez, George J. Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity
in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Looks at how Mexicans, coming to Los Angeles as temporary sojourners,
gradually became permanent residents and at the institutions and social
networks created by them.
Suro, Roberto. Strangers Among Us: How Latino Immigration Is Transforming
America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998. Looks at the essential issues con-
nected to Latino migration to the United States. The author takes stands
on issues, arguing, for example, that legal Latino immigrants need to take
a position against illegal immigration.

722
Time Line of U.S.
Immigration History
All legislative acts mentioned below are federal laws unless otherwise noted.
Subjects of essays in the main text are printed in small caps on their first
mentions. For additional historical statistics, see the articles on “Census, U.S.,”
“Demographics of immigration,” and “Racial and demographic trends,” as
well as the articles on individual immigrant groups.
c. 15,000 b.c.e Ancestors of Native Americans begin crossing the Bering Strait into
North America.
1003-1008 Norse explorers make tentative attempts to establish settlements in
North America.
1492 Christopher Columbus’s first voyage to the New World opens the
Western Hemisphere to immigration from the Old World.
1565 Spanish found St. Augustine in Florida—the earliest permanent
European settlement in North America.
1607 (April) English settlers arrive in Chesapeake Bay and found James-
town colony.
1619 First African slaves arriving in Virginia represent the first African
immigrants to North America.
1620 (November) Earliest Pilgrims land at Plymouth.
1624 Thirty French Belgian families, sponsored by the Dutch West India
Company, found New Amsterdam on the tip of Manhattan Island.
1626 First African slaves arrive in the Dutch lands of the northeast.
1629-1640 Puritan Great Migration to New England takes place.
1634 Sephardic Jews found the first recorded settlement of Jewish im-
migrants in North America in Maryland.
1638 First recorded settlement of Scandinavian immigrants is founded
along the Delaware River.
1654 Jewish immigrants begin arriving in New Amsterdam from Brazil.
1664 Dutch cede control of the colony of New Netherlands to England.
1680’s German immigrants who are beginning to arrive in Pennsylvania
become known as the “Pennsylvania Dutch” as their settlement
continues into the eighteenth century.
1681 William Penn receives proprietorship of Pennsylvania from King
Charles II of England.
1695 Scotch-Irish immigrants begin arriving in North America.
723
Time Line of U.S. Immigration History
1784 Russians begin settling in Alaska.

1790 Naturalization Act of 1790, the first federal law addressing nat-
uralization issues, stipulates that any “free white person” may ob-
tain U.S. citizenship after two years of residency.
1790 Federal government conducts the first national census.
1790 Revenue Marine, the forerunner of the U.S. Coast Guard, is es-
tablished.
1798 Naturalization law is revised to require fourteen years of residence
before becoming a citizen.
1798 Passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts gives the U.S. president
the authority to deport all foreigners who are regarded as dan-
gerous.
1799 (February) Federal riot of 1799 in Philadelphia is the first mass
public reaction to the Alien and Sedition Acts.
1800 Led by the Federalist Party, the U.S. Congress passes the Alien
Acts. These include the Nationalization Act, which lengthens the
residency requirement for citizenship and makes citizenship more
difficult for immigrants to acquire; the Alien Act, which gives Presi-
dent John Adams the authority to deport any non-citizen thought
to be dangerous; and the Alien Enemies Act, which permits the
capture and imprisonment of enemy aliens in time of war.
1802 Congress reduces the residency requirement for becoming a citi-
zen to five years.
1808 Congress bans the importation of slaves. It continues to be legal to
hold native-born slaves and some slaves continue to be smuggled
into the United States from Africa and the Caribbean.
1819 U.S. begins to collect data on immigrants by requiring ship’s cap-
tains and others bringing in immigrants to keep records and sub-
mit manifests.
1834 Inventor Samuel F. B. Morse’s anti-Roman Catholic tract, Foreign
Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States calls for the forma-
tion of the Anti-Popery Union to resist the influence of Catholic
immigrants.
1844 (May-July) Anti-Irish riots in Philadelphia express anti-immigrant
sentiments of nativism.
1845 Ireland experiences a potato crop failure, beginning the Great
Irish Famine, which prompts almost 500,000 people to migrate
from Ireland to North America between 1845 and 1850.
1848 (February) Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ends the Mexican War;
Mexico cedes its northern territories to the United States, and
about 100,000 Mexicans suddenly become citizens of the United
States.
724
1849 California gold rush begins and attracts a wave of Chinese im-
migrants to the United States. Some of these immigrants settle in
San Francisco, where they build the first American Chinatown.
1854 Chinese district associations in the United States join together to
form the Chinese Six Companies, which becomes the primary or-
ganization representing Chinese residents.
1854 Anti-immigrant Native American Party, also known as the “Know-
Nothing Party” wins every statewide office and a majority of seats
in the state legislature in Massachusetts elections.
1857 William Marcy Tweed becomes a leader of New York City’s
Tammany Hall and uses his influence in machine politics to assist
arriving immigrants while soliciting their political support.
1859 CLOTILDE slave ship is the last American ship to deliver involuntary
African immigrants to the United States.
1861-1865 U.S. Civil War disrupts immigration from Europe.
1866 Ku Klux Klan is founded in Tennessee.
1868 In order to encourage Chinese immigrants to settle on the West
Coast, the United States persuades the Chinese government to rat-
ify the Burlingame Treaty, which allows people to leave China
for America.
1869 Transcontinental railroad is completed. This releases immigrant
workers, many of them Chinese, into the job market, especially in
California.
1870 Naturalization Act of 1870 extends naturalization rights to people
of African descent, but excludes other non-whites.
1875 (March) Congress passes the Page law to prevent Asian prostitutes
from entering the United States.
1880 Italian immigrants begin entering the country in large numbers.
1882 Chinese Exclusion Act bans the entry of Chinese laborers into
the United States for ten years.
1884-1893 Constitutionality of the Chinese Exclusion Act is tested in the Chi-
nese exclusion cases.
1885 (December) U.S. Supreme Court approves taxing immigrants in
the so-called Head money cases.
1888 American Protective Association is founded to combat the growing
influence of Roman Catholic immigrants.
1889 Jane Addams establishes Hull-House in Chicago, helping to begin
the settlement house movement.
1890’s Anti-Asian "yellow peril" campaign develops on the West Coast.
1891 (March) Bureau of Immigration—the forerunner of the Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service—is established, and Congress
sets health qualifications for new immigrants.
725
1892 Geary Act extends the Chinese Exclusion Act for an additional ten
years and requires Chinese in the United States to obtain a certifi-
cate of residence.
1892 First newspaper for Arab immigrants is started in New York City.
1892 Quarantine station for immigrants opens on the northwest side of
Angel Island in San Francisco Bay.
1892 (January) Ellis Island, the largest and most famous immigrant sta-
tion in the United States, opens. During the turn of the century
wave of immigration, from 1892 to 1924, three-quarters of all the
immigrants arriving in the United States arrive through Ellis Is-
land.
1895 Chinese American Citizens Alliance is formed in San Francisco.
1898 (March) In the Wong Kim Ark case, the Supreme Court rules that
children born in the United States are U.S. citizens, regardless of
the status of their parents.
1903-1905 Approximately 7,200 Korean immigrants arrive in Hawaii to work
on sugar plantations.
1904 Congress extends the Chinese Exclusion Act indefinitely.
1904 First wave of Sikh immigrants arrives in North America.
1906 American Jewish Committee is formed as an advocacy group for
Jewish immigrants.
1906 Hawaii Sugar Planters Association hires attorney A. F. Judd to
travel to the Philippines to recruit field workers and make arrange-
ments for bringing the workers to Hawaii. By 1930, three quarters
of the agricultural workers in Hawaii are Filipinos.
1906 Upton Sinclair’s novel The Jungle exposes harsh living conditions of
immigrants working in Chicago.
1906 (October) Japanese segregation in California schools begins
when the San Francisco school board orders the segregation of
Japanese pupils.
1907 Immigration Act of 1907 increases the head tax on new immigrants
from two to four dollars and, in a provision aimed at Japanese im-
migrants, gives the president of the United States the authority to
deny admission to any immigrants he believes have a negative in-
fluence on labor conditions.
1907 (March) United States and Japan reach the Gentleman’s Agree-
ment, under which the United States allows Japanese residents to
attend San Francisco public schools, and Japan agrees to end the
emigration of Japanese laborers to the United States.
1908 Israel Zangwill’s play The Melting Pot introduces the term “melting
pot” to the English language.
726
1910 Immigration station begins operating at China Cove on Angel Is-

land in San Francisco Bay. The Angel Island facility will operate un-
til 1940, handling 100,000 immigrants granted entry into the
United States, most of them from Asia. These include 60,000 Chi-
nese immigrants.
1910 Mexican Revolution begins. Political and economic chaos in Mex-
ico over the following ten years cause an estimated quarter of a
million Mexicans to resettle across the border in the United States.
1911 California legislators introduce twenty-seven bills for alien land
laws designed to prevent Japanese immigrants from owning land
in the state.
1911 (March) Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire kills 146 garment
workers—mostly women immigrants—in New York City.
1916 Naturalist Madison Grant advances the idea of "Mongrelization"
in The Passing of the Great Race, which classified national and ethnic
groups as “races.”
1916 Marcus Garvey founds the Universal Negro Improvement Asso-
ciation in New York City.
1917 (April) United States enters World War I, and President Woodrow
Wilson establishes regulations on enemy aliens, restricting the
movements and rights of people from the countries with which the
United States is at war. Federal agents intern 6,300 people under
these regulations.
1917 (May) Immigration Act of 1917 bars the entry of immigrants
who cannot read or write in English or in their own languages, as
well as immigrants from Asia.
1917 (October) Russian Revolution begins period of increasing Russian
emigration.
1919-1920 Under the direction of U.S. attorney general A. Mitchell Palmer,
federal agents round up and deport foreign radicals with state and
local police assistance in a series of purges known as the Palmer
raids.
1920-1921 Sacco and Vanzetti trial reveals depth of American prejudice
against Italian immigrants.
1921 (May) Immigration Act of 1921 creates the first national origins
quota law. This limits immigrants from any particular country to 3
percent of the number of people from that country in the United
States in 1910. The act also places a ceiling of 350,000 immigrants
per year.
1922 (September) Cable Act restricts the citizenship rights of immi-
grants.
1922 (November) In Ozawa v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court
rules that Japanese aliens are not “white” and cannot be natural-
ized as citizens.
727
1924 (May) Immigration Act of 1924, also known as the National Ori-
gins Act, tightens the national origins quotas by limiting immigra-
tion from any country to 2 percent of the number of people from
that country living in the United States in 1890. The annual ceiling
on immigrants is lowered to 165,000. The act also creates the U.S.
Border Patrol.
1927 Marcus Garvey is declared an undesirable alien and is deported.
1929 Congress makes annual immigration quotas by national origin per-
manent and sets the annual ceiling on immigrants at roughly
150,000. The restrictions of the 1920’s bias immigration heavily in
favor of northern and western Europe, which receives 83 percent
of the visas to enter the United States as immigrants. Southern and
eastern Europe receive 15 percent of the visas and only 2 percent
of the visas go to the rest of the world.
1929 League of United Latin American Citizens is founded as an ad-
vocacy organization for Latinos.
1930 (August) Japanese American Citizens League is founded.
1931 Federal government begins Mexican deportations to conserve
jobs for American citizens.
1934 (March) Tydings-McDuffie Act places the Philippines on track to-
ward independence from the United States, reclassifies Filipinos
from American nationals to aliens, and restricts the admission of
Filipino immigrants to the United States to only fifty persons per
year. After World War II, the Philippines becomes independent,
the quota for Filipino immigrants is raised to one hundred per
year, and Filipinos become eligible to naturalize as U.S. citizens.
1937 Sociologist Marcus Lee Hansen publishes The Problem of the Third
Generation Immigrants, which introduces the concept of the Hansen
effect.
1939 SS Louis, carrying more than 900 German Jewish refugees, is met
off the coast of Florida by a Coast Guard patrol boat sent to pre-
vent refugees from swimming ashore.
1939 John Steinbeck’s novel The Grapes of Wrath chronicles the internal
migrations of Americans fleeing the Oklahoma Dust Bowl.
1940 In response to war in Europe and Asia, the Alien Registration Act
requires the registration and fingerprinting of all non-citizens in
the United States. About 5 million non-citizens register.
1941 (December) Japan’s attack on the Pearl Harbor naval base near
Honolulu, Hawaii, brings the United States into World War II.
1942 Wartime labor needs lead the United States to establish the bracero
program, which brings Mexican laborers, primarily in agriculture,
to the United States. The program continues through 1964 and
helps to establish a pattern of labor migration from Mexico.
728
1942 (February) Japanese American internment begins when Presi-

dent Franklin D. Roosevelt signs an executive order requiring all
persons of Japanese ancestry living west of the Rocky Mountains on
the mainland United States to be sent to remote camps for the du-
ration of World War II. Later, Japanese Peruvians were deported
from Peru to the United States, where they were immediately in-
terned in the Japanese American camps.
1943 (December) Immigration Act of 1943 repeals Asian exclusion
laws.
1945-1990 More than 5 million Afro-Caribbean immigrants—including
Cubans and Haitians—enter the United States.
1945 (May) End of World War II in Europe leaves many people home-
less
1945 (December) War Brides Act enables wives and children of U.S.
servicemen to enter the country on a non-quota basis.
1948 In response to urging by President Harry S. Truman, Congress
passes the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 to deal with the problem
of refugees and displaced people in Europe following the war. Tru-
man is criticized for excluding more than 90 percent of displaced
Jews. The act is revised in 1950 and most of the discrimination
against Jewish refugees is removed.
1950-1953 United States fights in the Korean War.
1951 United Nations holds Convention Relating to the Status of Ref-
ugees.
1952 (June) Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known
as the McCarran-Walter Act, becomes the basis of U.S. immigration
policy. It establishes a four-category preference system, makes it
easier for Asians to immigrate, and makes it tougher for commu-
nists to enter the United States. The act retains the national origins
quota system.
1953 (August) President Harry S. Truman’s appeal to Congress to help
escapees from the communist countries of Eastern Europe leads to
the passage of the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, which allows
200,000 more visas than are authorized under national immigra-
tion quotas.
1954 Ellis Island closes. From 1892 through 1953, the Ellis Island immi-
gration facility has processed more than 12 million immigrants.
1954 (June-July) U.S. government deports thousands of Mexican labor-
ers in Operation Wetback.
1956 President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorizes the admission of
38,000 Hungarian refugees who have fled Hungary after a failed
anticommunist uprising.
729
1957 Congress passes the Refugee-Escapee Act, which defines refugees

as those escaping from communist or communist-dominated coun-
tries.
1958 Future president John F. Kennedy publishes A Nation of Immigrants,
calling attention to the contributions made by immigrants.
1959 Fidel Castro leads revolutionary forces to power in Cuba.
1959 Tibetan uprising against the Chinese government prompts 100,000
Tibetans to go to India.
1959-1962 First Cuban immigrants to flee Castro’s new government arrive in
the United States and settle primarily in the Little Havana area
of Miami.
1960 U.S. government creates the Cuban Refugee Program to handle
the processing and resettlement of Cuban refugees.
1963 Miami-Dade County, with its growing population of Cubans and
other Hispanics, becomes the location of the first bilingual educa-
tion program in U.S. public schools.
1964 Milton Gordon publishes Assimilation in American Life, a major
study of the assimilation of immigrants into American society.
1965-1973 Chartered planes known as “Freedom Flights” bring more than
260,000 Cuban refugees to the United States. Fidel Castro orders
the flights ended on April 6, 1973.
1965 Thanks to relaxation of immigration restrictions, Jamaican immi-
grants begin arriving in larger numbers than ever before.
1965 President Lyndon Johnson makes the long-closed and decaying
immigrant station at Ellis Island part of the Statue of Liberty
National Monument. Planning begins for the restoration of Ellis
Island.
1965 (October) Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also
known as the Hart-Cellar Act, expands the preference system
adopted by the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act. The new law
repeals the national origins quota system and makes family reunifi-
cation the primary basis of immigration law. The act also estab-
lishes a ceiling of 170,000 on immigration from the Eastern Hemi-
sphere and 120,000 from the Western Hemisphere.
1966 (January) The term “model minority” first appears in a New York
Times Magazine article by sociologist William Petersen.
1968 Bilingual Education Act, which is passed as Title 7 of the Ele-
mentary and Secondary Education Act, provides funds for special
programs for speakers of minority languages.
1968 Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund is
formed in San Antonio, Texas, to promote Latino rights.
730
1972-1980 Around 50,000 Haitian boat people flee from the dictatorship of
Jean-Claude Duvalier, arriving illegally on the coast of Florida in
hastily constructed, overcrowded boats. In response, the U.S. gov-
ernment begins the practice of interdiction, stopping the Haitian
boats at sea and returning most of their passengers to Haiti.
1974 Asian American Legal Defense Fund is formed to defend and
promote the legal rights of Asian Americans.
1974 (January) In Lau v. Nichols the U.S. Supreme Court rules that
public schools must provide bilingual education to limited-English-
speaking students.
1975 (April) After fall of Saigon government, U.S. president Gerald
Ford authorizes the admission of 130,400 refugees from Vietnam,
Laos, and Cambodia. Most of those in this first wave of refugees
are Vietnamese immigrants and the numbers of Southeast
Asian immigrants increase.
1976 First Hmong immigrants begin arriving in the United States.
1977 U.S. attorney general Griffin Bell uses his parole authority to allow
thousands of people from Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam to resettle
in the United States. President Jimmy Carter signs legislation per-
mitting these refugees to become permanent residents.
1978 Federal government adopts a new worldwide ceiling of 290,000 im-
migrants per year, replacing the Eastern and Western ceilings es-
tablished in 1965.
1979 Islamic revolution in Iran leads to large increase in the numbers of
Iranian immigrants to the United States and other nations.
1980-1990 Civil wars rage in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. An esti-
mated one million political and economic refugees from these
countries flee north to the United States, settling mostly in Califor-
nia and on the East Coast.
1980’s Liberalization of emigration laws under Mikhail Gorbachev leads
to an increase in the numbers of Soviet Jewish immigrants to
the United States.
1980 In response to the large numbers of immigrants that have begun to
arrive from Southeast Asia and other locations, Congress passes the
Refugee Act. This places refugees in a category separate from
other immigrants, and it provides a definition of refugees as peo-
ple fleeing their countries because of persecution on grounds of
race, religion, nationality, or political opinion. The president is
given authority to establish the number of refugees to be allowed
into the United States. The ceiling on regular immigrants is low-
ered from 290,000 per year to 270,000 per year.
1980 (April-September) Fidel Castro opens the port of Mariel to Cubans
who want to leave the country. More than 115,000 people take ad-
vantage of the Mariel boatlift to cross to Key West, Florida.
731
1981 Congress sets an annual quota of 20,000 Taiwanese immigrants.

1982 (June) In Plyler v. Doe, the U.S. Supreme Court extends the
Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause to give
noncitizens the right to public social services.
1983 (June) Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, a
U.S. Supreme Court ruling on deportation has wide-ranging politi-
cal ramifications.
1984 (December) United States and Cuba agree that Cuba will take back
nearly 3,000 criminals and mental patients who have arrived with
the Mariel boatlift and the United States would issue visas to politi-
cal prisoners and others who wished to leave Cuba.
1986 Concerns over illegal immigration into the United States lead Con-
gress to pass the Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986. This raises the annual ceiling on legal immigration from the
270,000 established six years earlier to 540,000. To decrease the
jobs drawing illegal aliens into the country, the act introduces
stiff penalties for employers of those in the country illegally. The
act also offers amnesty to illegal aliens who can prove that they
have resided in the United States since January 1, 1982.
1988 Congress passes the Civil Liberties Act, which authorizes each in-
ternee of a wartime relocation camp for Japanese Americans to re-
ceive $20,000 and an apology from the United States. About 60,000
Japanese Americans apply for and receive these reparations.
1989 (June) Helsinki Watch report on U.S. refugee policy criticizes
American treatment of refugees.
1990’s Tibetan immigrants begin arriving in the United States.
1990 (September) National Immigration Museum opens at Ellis
Island.
1990 (November) Immigration Act of 1990 raises the worldwide ceil-
ing on immigration to 700,000 for 1992 through 1994, with the
ceiling to go down to 675,000. The act revises the 1952 Immigra-
tion Act so that immigrants can no longer be excluded because of
political beliefs or affiliations.
1992 President George Bush issues Executive Order 12807, directing the
Coast Guard to interdict undocumented aliens at sea and to return
them to their places of origin.
1992 (May) Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance is formed to pro-
mote the interests of Asian and Pacific islander immigrants.
1993 (June) Chinese detentions in New York, as federal authorities
take into custody 276 illegal immigrants.
732
1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is established

among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The act is intended
primarily to reduce barriers to trade, but it also requires the three
countries to ease restrictions on the movement of business execu-
tives and professionals. This promotes professional migration from
Canada to the United States, in particular.
1994 (April) In the Florida illegal-immigrant suit, the state of
Florida demands restitution from the federal government for its
own expenditures on illegal immigrants.
1994 (June) The Congressional Commission on Immigration Reform,
also known as the Jordan Commission, calls for limiting legal immi-
gration to 500,000 per year, with 100,000 slots to be granted to im-
migrants with needed job skills, and the report calls for strict con-
trols on the hiring of illegal immigrants where necessary.
1994 (August) Responding to the large numbers of Cubans attempting
to leave their country after Fidel Castro declares that he is not op-
posed to people leaving, the U.S. changes its Cuban refugee pol-
icy when President Bill Clinton declares that Cuban refugees will
no long be allowed automatic entry to the United States.
1994 (November) California voters approve Proposition 187, a voter
initiative designed to limit public services available to undocu-
mented immigrants.
1995 Thai garment worker enslavement scandal is revealed when cap-
tive immigrant garment workers are freed in Southern California.
1996 Congress votes to increase the numbers of Border Patrol agents
from 5,000 to 10,000 over the following five years and it orders the
construction of fences along the U.S.-Mexico border.
1996 Welfare Reform Act denies public assistance services to resident
aliens for a period of time.
1996 (March) Immigration and Naturalization Service creates a self-
petitioning process for immigrants who are battered spouses and
battered children of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents. If
approved, the petitions enable immigrants to remain in the United
States after separating from abusive spouses.
1998 Population of Muslims in the United States reaches about 6 mil-
lion persons.
1998 (June) California voters approve Proposition 227, a voter initia-
tive designed to end bilingual education in public schools.
1999 (November) Elián González rescue off the southern coast of
Florida touches off a diplomatic conflict between the United States
and Cuba.
2001 In Zadvydas v. Davis the Supreme Court rules that the govern-
ment may not detain deportable aliens indefinitely simply because
no other country accepts them.
733
2001 (June) In Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the citizenship of children born
abroad and out of wedlock who have only one American parent.
2001 (September) In September 11 terrorist attacks, nineteen Is-
lamic radicals hijack four American airlines; they fly two planes
into the towers of New York’s World Trade Center, destroying the
buildings and killing thousands of people. A third plane hits part
of the Pentagon, and a fourth crashes in Pennsylvania after a strug-
gle between passengers and hijackers. Nine days later, U.S. presi-
dent George W. Bush reacts to the events of September 11 by creat-
ing the Office of Homeland Security. The following January this is
upgraded to the Department of Homeland Security.
2001 (October) Congress passes Public Law 107-56, known as the USA
Patriot Act. The act includes new reasons for denying entry into
the United States, gives a broader definition to the concept of ter-
rorist activity, and increases the causes for deporting visitors and
immigrants.
2001 (November) Congress passes the Border Security Act, authorizing
more funds for immigration and customs staff, providing for the
sharing of information on deportation cases among federal agen-
cies, tracking foreign students, and tightening oversight in other
ways.
2003 (March) Functions and offices of the Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service are transferred to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services (UCIS), a bureau of the Department of Homeland Secu-
rity. Actor Arnold Schwarzenegger—an immigrant from Austria—
is elected governor of California.
2004 Approximately 9 million illegal aliens are believed to be living in
the United States.
2005 With a budget of more than $40 billion, the Department of Home-
land Security has such responsibilities as protecting national tar-
gets, coordinating domestic intelligence and preparedness, and
monitoring the flow of immigration.

734
Indexes
Category Index
African Americans . . . . . . . 737 Japanese Immigrants . . . . . . 743
Asian Immigrants . . . . . . . . 737 Jewish Immigrants . . . . . . . 743
Border Control . . . . . . . . . 738 Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
Chinese Immigrants . . . . . . 738 Language . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
Citizenship and Latino Immigrants . . . . . . . 743
Naturalization . . . . . . . . 739 Law Enforcement. . . . . . . . 744
Civil Rights and Laws and Treaties. . . . . . . . 744
Liberties . . . . . . . . . . . 739 Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . 744
Court Cases . . . . . . . . . . . 740 Mexican Immigrants . . . . . . 744
Cuban Immigrants . . . . . . . 740 Middle Eastern
Demographics . . . . . . . . . 740 Immigrants. . . . . . . . . . 744
Discrimination . . . . . . . . . 740 Native Americans . . . . . . . . 744
Economics . . . . . . . . . . . 741 Nativism and Racism . . . . . . 745
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . 741 Refugees . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
Ethnic Enclaves . . . . . . . . . 741 Religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
European Immigrants . . . . . 741 Slavery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
Families and Marriage . . . . . 742 Sociological Theories . . . . . 746
Government and Politics. . . . 742 Stereotypes . . . . . . . . . . . 746
Illegal Immigration. . . . . . . 742 West Indian Immigrants . . . . 746
Irish Immigrants . . . . . . . . 742 Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746
AFRICAN AMERICANS Universal Negro Improvement

African immigrants, 3 Association, 667
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 West Indian immigrants, 689
Clotilde slave ship, 168
Cuban immigrants and African ASIAN IMMIGRANTS
Americans, 180 Alien land laws, 19
Discrimination, 201 Amerasians, 22
Haitian boat people, 297 Asian American education, 52
Haitian immigrants, 300 Asian American Legal Defense
Irish immigrants and African Fund, 56
Americans, 400 Asian American literature, 57
Jamaican immigrants, 415 Asian American stereotypes, 60
Korean immigrants and African Asian American women, 63
Americans, 469 Asian Indian immigrants, 67
Ku Klux Klan, 477 Asian Indian immigrants and family
Literature, 507 customs, 72
Palmer raids, 584 Asian Pacific American Labor
Racial and ethnic demographic Alliance, 76
trends, 606 Chinatowns, 130
Santería, 629
737
Category Index
Chinese American Citizens Alliance, Sikh immigrants, 647

133 Southeast Asian immigrants, 649
Chinese detentions in New York, Taiwanese immigrants, 655
138 Thai garment worker enslavement,
Chinese Exclusion Act, 140 657
Chinese exclusion cases, 144 Tibetan immigrants, 659
Chinese immigrants, 146 Vietnamese immigrants, 670
Chinese immigrants and California’s War brides, 681
gold rush, 151 War Brides Act, 685
Chinese immigrants and family Wong Kim Ark case, 699
customs, 155 “Yellow peril” campaign, 707
Chinese Six Companies, 160
Coolies, 174 BORDER CONTROL
Filipino immigrants, 258 Border Patrol, U.S., 96
Filipino immigrants and family Bracero program, 103
customs, 264 Chinese detentions in New York,
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276 138
Hmong immigrants, 324 Coast Guard, U.S., 172
Immigration Act of 1917, 339 Demographics of immigration, 190
Immigration Act of 1921, 343 Deportation, 195
Immigration Act of 1924, 349 Florida illegal-immigrant suit, 267
Immigration Act of 1943, 353 González rescue, 290
Immigration and Nationality Act of Green cards, 293
1952, 358 Haitian boat people, 297
Immigration and Nationality Act of Homeland Security Department,
1965, 362 327
Immigration and Naturalization Illegal aliens, 334
Service v. Chadha, 371 Immigration and Naturalization
Japanese American Citizens League, Service, 366
424 Immigration law, 376
Japanese American internment, Justice and immigration, 458
427 Latinos, 481
Japanese immigrants, 431 Operation Wetback, 572
Japanese Peruvians, 437 September 11 terrorist attacks, 637
Japanese segregation in California Undocumented workers, 665
schools, 438 Visas, 676
Korean immigrants, 466
Korean immigrants and African CHINESE IMMIGRANTS
Americans, 469 Alien land laws, 19
Korean immigrants and family Amerasians, 22
customs, 473 Asian American education, 52
Lau v. Nichols, 499 Asian American Legal Defense
Little Tokyos, 516 Fund, 56
Migration, 542 Asian American literature, 57
Model minorities, 549 Asian American stereotypes, 60
Nguyen v. Immigration and Asian American women, 63
Naturalization Service, 571 Burlingame Treaty, 109
Ozawa v. United States, 576 California gold rush, 115
Page law, 579 Chinatowns, 130
738
Category Index
Chinese American Citizens Alliance, Immigration law, 376

133 Immigration Reform and Control
Chinese detentions in New York, Act of 1986, 383
138 Japanese American Citizens League,
Chinese exclusion cases, 144 Naturalization, 562
Chinese immigrants, 146 Naturalization Act of 1790, 569
Chinese immigrants and California’s Nguyen v. Immigration and
gold rush, 151 Naturalization Service, 571
Chinese immigrants and family Ozawa v. United States, 576
customs, 155 War brides, 681
Chinese Six Companies, 160 War Brides Act, 685
Coolies, 174 Wong Kim Ark case, 699
Demographics of immigration, 190
Family businesses, 246 CIVIL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES
Generational acculturation, 273 Accent discrimination, 1
History of U.S. immigration, 316 African immigrants, 3
Immigration Act of 1921, 343 American Jewish Committee, 26
Immigration Act of 1924, 349 Asian Pacific American Labor
Immigration Act of 1943, 353 Alliance, 76
Lau v. Nichols, 499 Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90
Migration, 542 Chicano movement, 125
Model minorities, 549 Chinese American Citizens Alliance,
Nativism, 558 133
Naturalization, 562 Chinese Six Companies, 160
Page law, 579 Citizenship, 164
Racial and ethnic demographic Deportation, 195
trends, 606 Discrimination, 201
War brides, 681 English-only and official English
Wong Kim Ark case, 699 movements, 214
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Farmworkers’ union, 251
Immigration law, 376
CITIZENSHIP AND Japanese American Citizens League,
NATURALIZATION 424
Alien and Sedition Acts, 15 Japanese American internment, 427
Assimilation theories, 79 Japanese segregation in California
Cable Act, 113 schools, 438
Chinese Exclusion Act, 140 Jewish immigrants, 443
Citizenship, 164 Ku Klux Klan, 477
Deportation, 195 Lau v. Nichols, 499
Discrimination, 201 League of United Latin American
Green cards, 293 Citizens, 503
Immigration Act of 1943, 353 Mexican American Legal Defense
Immigration and Nationality Act of and Education Fund, 531
1952, 358 Mexican deportations during the
Immigration and Nationality Act of Depression, 533
1965, 362 Naturalization, 562
Immigration and Naturalization Palmer raids, 584
Service, 366 Proposition 187, 598
739
Category Index
Proposition 227, 600 Celtic Irish, 119

September 11 terrorist attacks, 637 Censuses, U.S., 120
Universal Negro Improvement Chinatowns, 130
Association, 667 Chinese immigrants, 146
Zadvydas v. Davis, 711 Cuban immigrants, 176
Demographics of immigration, 190
COURT CASES Dominican immigrants, 207
Chinese exclusion cases, 144 Filipino immigrants, 258
Head money cases, 309 German immigrants, 284
Immigration and Naturalization Haitian immigrants, 300
Service v. Chadha, 371 Hawaiian and Pacific islander
Lau v. Nichols, 499 immigrants, 304
Nguyen v. Immigration and History of U.S. immigration, 316
Naturalization Service, 571 Hmong immigrants, 324
Ozawa v. United States, 576 Immigration “crisis,” 372
Plyler v. Doe, 590 Iranian immigrants, 392
Wong Kim Ark case, 699 Irish immigrants, 395
Zadvydas v. Davis, 711 Israeli immigrants, 405
Italian immigrants, 409
CUBAN IMMIGRANTS Jamaican immigrants, 415
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 Japanese immigrants, 431
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90 Japanese Peruvians, 437
Cuban immigrants, 176 Jewish immigrants, 443
Cuban immigrants and African Jews and Arab Americans, 454
Americans, 180 Korean immigrants, 466
Cuban refugee policy, 184 Latinos, 481
Family businesses, 246 Muslims, 555
Florida illegal-immigrant suit, 267 Polish immigrants, 594
González rescue, 290 Push and pull factors, 604
Immigration Reform and Control Racial and ethnic demographic
Act of 1986, 383 trends, 606
Latinos, 481 Russian immigrants, 622
Latinos and employment, 488 Scandinavian immigrants, 630
Latinos and family customs, 494 Sikh immigrants, 647
Little Havana, 512 Southeast Asian immigrants, 649
Mariel boatlift, 524 Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653
Santería, 629 Taiwanese immigrants, 655
Tibetan immigrants, 659
DEMOGRAPHICS Vietnamese immigrants, 670
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 War brides, 681
Arab American intergroup relations, West Indian immigrants, 689
33 Women immigrants, 694
Arab immigrants, 41
Ashkenazic and German Jewish DISCRIMINATION
immigrants, 49 Accent discrimination, 1
Asian American women, 63 Alien land laws, 19
Asian Indian immigrants, 67 Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29
Asian Indian immigrants and family Arab American stereotypes, 38
customs, 72 Asian American stereotypes, 60
740
Category Index
British as dominant group, 107 Bilingual Education Act of 1968,

Chinese exclusion cases, 144 Japanese segregation in California
Deportation, 195 schools, 438
Discrimination, 201 Lau v. Nichols, 499
English-only and official English Mexican American Legal Defense
movements, 214 and Education Fund, 531
Ethnic enclaves, 219 Proposition 227, 600
Immigration Act of 1921, 343 ETHNIC ENCLAVES
Immigration Act of 1924, 349 Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11
Immigration Act of 1990, 356 Ashkenazic and German Jewish
Immigration law, 376 immigrants, 49
Indigenous superordination, 391 Asian American women, 63
Irish immigrants and Chinatowns, 130
discrimination, 402 Eastern European Jewish
Irish stereotypes, 403 immigrants, 212
Japanese American internment, 427 Ethnic enclaves, 219
Japanese segregation in California Generational acculturation, 273
schools, 438 Irish immigrants, 395
Ku Klux Klan, 477 Italian immigrants, 409
Mexican deportations during the Little Havana, 512
Depression, 533 Little Italies, 514
Nativism, 558 Little Tokyos, 516
Page law, 579
September 11 terrorist attacks, 637 EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS
Xenophobia, 702 Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Ashkenazic and German Jewish
immigrants, 49
ECONOMICS British as dominant group, 107
Bracero program, 103 California gold rush, 115
California gold rush, 115 Celtic Irish, 119
Chinese immigrants and California’s Eastern European Jewish
gold rush, 151 immigrants, 212
Family businesses, 246 Euro-Americans, 222
Farmworkers’ union, 251 European immigrant literature, 224
Garment industry, 270 European immigrants, 1790-1892,
Head money cases, 309 235
Illegal aliens, 334 European immigrants, 1892-1943,
Indentured servitude, 387 240
Korean immigrants and African German and Irish immigration of
Americans, 469 the 1840’s, 281
Latinos and employment, 488 German immigrants, 284
Undocumented workers, 665 Gypsy immigrants, 295
History of U.S. immigration, 316
EDUCATION Indentured servitude, 387
Accent discrimination, 1 Irish immigrants, 395
Asian American education, 52 Irish immigrants and African
Bilingual education, 85 Americans, 400
741
Category Index
Irish immigrants and Southeast Asian immigrants, 649

discrimination, 402 Vietnamese immigrants, 670
Irish stereotypes, 403 War brides, 681
Italian immigrants, 409 War Brides Act, 685
Jamestown colony, 419 Women immigrants, 694
Jewish immigrants, 443
Jewish settlement of New York, GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
449 Alien and Sedition Acts, 15
Jews and Arab Americans, 454 Federal riot of 1799, 257
Literature, 507 Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276
Little Italies, 514 Helsinki Watch report on U.S.
Migration, 542 refugee policy, 310
Nativism, 558 Immigration and Naturalization
Polish immigrants, 594 Service v. Chadha, 371
Russian immigrants, 622 Immigration law, 376
Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 626 Know-Nothing Party, 465
Scandinavian immigrants, 630 Machine politics, 518
Scotch-Irish immigrants, 635 Mexican deportations during the
Sephardic Jews, 636 Depression, 533
Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653 Naturalization Act of 1790, 569
War brides, 681 Operation Wetback, 572
War Brides Act, 685 Palmer raids, 584
White ethnics, 693 September 11 terrorist attacks,
637
FAMILIES AND MARRIAGE
Amerasians, 22 ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
Asian American women, 63 Au pairs, 84
Asian Indian immigrants and family Border Patrol, U.S., 96
customs, 72 Bracero program, 103
Assimilation theories, 79 Coast Guard, U.S., 172
Cable Act, 113 Cuban refugee policy, 184
Chinese immigrants and family Deportation, 195
customs, 155 Florida illegal-immigrant suit, 267
Family businesses, 246 Green cards, 293
Filipino immigrants and family Haitian boat people, 297
customs, 264 Homeland Security Department,
González rescue, 290 327
Hull-House, 332 Illegal aliens, 334
Indentured servitude, 387 Immigration and Naturalization
Japanese American internment, Service, 366
427 Immigration “crisis,” 372
Korean immigrants and family Immigration law, 376
customs, 473 Justice and immigration, 458
Latinos and family customs, 494 Mexican deportations during the
Mail-order brides, 521 Depression, 533
Middle Eastern immigrant families, Operation Wetback, 572
538 Page law, 579
Picture brides, 589 Plyler v. Doe, 590
Settlement house movement, 643 Undocumented workers, 665
742
Category Index
IRISH IMMIGRANTS Russian immigrants, 622

Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29 Sephardic Jews, 636
British as dominant group, 107 Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653
Celtic Irish, 119
European immigrants, 1790-1892, LABOR
235 Asian Pacific American Labor
Federal riot of 1799, 257 Alliance, 76
German and Irish immigration of Au pairs, 84
the 1840’s, 281 Bracero program, 103
Irish immigrants, 395 Chinese immigrants and California’s
Irish stereotypes, 403 gold rush, 151
Nativism, 558 Coolies, 174
Scotch-Irish immigrants, 635 Family businesses, 246
JAPANESE IMMIGRANTS Garment industry, 270
Alien land laws, 19 Green cards, 293
Amerasians, 22 Indentured servitude, 387
Asian American education, 52 Latinos, 481
Asian American literature, 57 Latinos and employment, 488
Asian American stereotypes, 60 Latinos and family customs, 494
Asian American women, 63 Mexican deportations during the
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276 Depression, 533
Japanese American Citizens League, Push and pull factors, 604
424 Thai garment worker enslavement,
Japanese American internment, 657
427 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire,
Japanese immigrants, 431 661
Japanese Peruvians, 437 Undocumented workers, 665
Japanese segregation in California Visas, 676
schools, 438 “Yellow peril” campaign, 707
Little Tokyos, 516
Model minorities, 549 LANGUAGE
Ozawa v. United States, 576 Accent discrimination, 1
Picture brides, 589 Anglo-conformity, 27
War Brides Act, 685 Assimilation theories, 79
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Bilingual education, 85
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90
JEWISH IMMIGRANTS English-only and official English
American Jewish Committee, 26 movements, 214
Ashkenazic and German Jewish Generational acculturation, 273
immigrants, 49 Immigration Act of 1917, 339
Eastern European Jewish Lau v. Nichols, 499
immigrants, 212 Melting pot, 529
Israeli immigrants, 405 Proposition 227, 600
Jewish immigrants, 443
Jewish settlement of New York, 449 LATINO IMMIGRANTS
Jews and Arab Americans, 454 Border Patrol, U.S., 96
Middle Eastern immigrant families, Bracero program, 103
538 Chicano movement, 125
743
Category Index
Cuban immigrants, 176 Helsinki Watch report on U.S.

Cuban immigrants and African refugee policy, 310
Americans, 180 Immigration Act of 1917, 339
Cuban refugee policy, 184 Immigration Act of 1921, 343
Dominican immigrants, 207 Immigration Act of 1924, 349
Latinos, 481 Immigration Act of 1943, 353
Latinos and employment, 488 Immigration Act of 1990, 356
Latinos and family customs, 494 Immigration and Nationality Act of
League of United Latin American 1952, 358
Citizens, 503 Immigration and Nationality Act of
Little Havana, 512 1965, 362
Mariel boatlift, 524 Immigration law, 376
Mexican American Legal Defense Immigration Reform and Control
and Education Fund, 531 Act of 1986, 383
Mexican deportations during the Justice and immigration, 458
Depression, 533 Naturalization Act of 1790, 569
Operation Wetback, 572 Page law, 579
Proposition 187, 598 Proposition 187, 598
Proposition 227, 600 Proposition 227, 600
Santería, 629 Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 614
Undocumented workers, 665 War Brides Act, 685
LAW ENFORCEMENT LITERATURE

Border Patrol, U.S., 96 Asian American literature, 57
Coast Guard, U.S., 172 European immigrant literature, 224
Deportation, 195 Literature, 507
Green cards, 293
Homeland Security Department, MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS
327 Border Patrol, U.S., 96
Illegal aliens, 334 Bracero program, 103
Immigration and Naturalization Chicano movement, 125
Service, 366 Farmworkers’ union, 251
Immigration law, 376 Illegal aliens, 334
Mexican deportations during the Justice and immigration, 458
Depression, 533 League of United Latin American
Operation Wetback, 572 Citizens, 503
Palmer raids, 584 Mexican American Legal Defense
Undocumented workers, 665 and Education Fund, 531
Visas, 676 Mexican deportations during the
Depression, 533
LAWS AND TREATIES Operation Wetback, 572
Alien and Sedition Acts, 15 Proposition 187, 598
Alien land laws, 19 Proposition 227, 600
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 90 Undocumented workers, 665
Burlingame Treaty, 109
Cable Act, 113 MIDDLE EASTERN IMMIGRANTS
Chinese Exclusion Act, 140 Arab American intergroup relations,
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 276 33
Head money cases, 309 Arab American stereotypes, 38
744
Category Index
Arab immigrants, 41 REFUGEES

Iranian immigrants, 392 Amerasians, 22
Israeli immigrants, 405 Cuban immigrants, 176
Jewish immigrants, 443 Cuban immigrants and African
Jews and Arab Americans, 454 Americans, 180
Middle Eastern immigrant families, Cuban refugee policy, 184
538 Haitian boat people, 297
Muslims, 555 Haitian immigrants, 300
September 11 terrorist attacks, Helsinki Watch report on U.S.
637 refugee policy, 310
Hmong immigrants, 324
NATIVE AMERICANS Immigration and Nationality Act of
German immigrants, 284 1952, 358
Hawaiian and Pacific islander Immigration and Nationality Act of
immigrants, 304 1965, 362
Melting pot, 529 Immigration law, 376
Migrant superordination, 542 Japanese Peruvians, 437
Jewish settlement of New York, 449
NATIVISM AND RACISM Mariel boatlift, 524
Anglo-conformity, 27 Migration, 542
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29 Model minorities, 549
Asian American stereotypes, 60 Polish immigrants, 594
Chinese Exclusion Act, 140 Refugee fatigue, 612
Chinese exclusion cases, 144 Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 614
Chinese immigrants and California’s Refugees and racial/ethnic
gold rush, 151 relations, 618
English-only and official English Southeast Asian immigrants, 649
movements, 214 Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653
European immigrant literature, Vietnamese immigrants, 670
224 Women immigrants, 694
European immigrants, 1892-1943,
240 RELIGION
German and Irish immigration of American Jewish Committee, 26
the 1840’s, 281 Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29
Immigration Act of 1917, 339 Arab American intergroup relations,
Immigration Act of 1921, 343 33
Immigration Act of 1924, 349 Arab immigrants, 41
Immigration “crisis,” 372 Ashkenazic and German Jewish
Indigenous superordination, 391 immigrants, 49
Irish stereotypes, 403 Asian Indian immigrants and family
Know-Nothing Party, 465 customs, 72
Mongrelization, 554 Eastern European Jewish
Nativism, 558 immigrants, 212
Palmer raids, 584 Generational acculturation, 273
Refugees and racial/ethnic Iranian immigrants, 392
relations, 618 Irish immigrants, 395
Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 626 Irish stereotypes, 403
Xenophobia, 702 Israeli immigrants, 405
“Yellow peril” campaign, 707 Jewish immigrants, 443
745
Category Index
Jewish settlement of New York, 449 Arab American stereotypes, 38

Jews and Arab Americans, 454 Asian American stereotypes, 60
Melting pot, 529 Coolies, 174
Muslims, 555 Gypsy immigrants, 295
Santería, 629 Irish immigrants, 395
Sephardic Jews, 636 Irish stereotypes, 403
Sikh immigrants, 647 Jews and Arab Americans, 454
White ethnics, 702 Model minorities, 549
Operation Wetback, 572
SLAVERY
African immigrants, 3 WEST INDIAN IMMIGRANTS
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11 African immigrants, 3
British as dominant group, 107 Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 11
Clotilde slave ship, 168 Cuban immigrants, 176
Coolies, 174 Cuban immigrants and African
German immigrants, 284 Americans, 180
Indentured servitude, 387 Cuban refugee policy, 184
Jamaican immigrants, 415 Dominican immigrants, 207
Santería, 629 González rescue, 290
Thai garment worker enslavement, Haitian boat people, 297
657 Haitian immigrants, 300
Jamaican immigrants, 415
SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES Latinos, 481
Accent discrimination, 1 Santería, 629
Anglo-conformity, 27 West Indian immigrants, 689
Asian American education, 52
Assimilation theories, 79 WOMEN
Cultural pluralism, 188 Arab American stereotypes, 38
Generational acculturation, 273 Asian American women, 63
Hansen effect, 303 Au pairs, 84
Immigrant advantage, 338 Cable Act, 113
Indigenous superordination, 391 Garment industry, 270
Melting pot, 529 Hull-House, 332
Migrant superordination, 542 Indentured servitude, 387
Migration, 542 Mail-order brides, 521
Push and pull factors, 604 Picture brides, 589
Refugee fatigue, 612 Settlement house movement, 643
Twice migrants, 664 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire,
661
STEREOTYPES War brides, 681
Arab American intergroup War Brides Act, 685
relations, 33 Women immigrants, 694
746
Index of Court Cases
Afroyim v. Rusk, 568 Immigration and Naturalization Service v.
Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 566 Chadha, 371-372
Ambach v. Norwick, 564
Korematsu v. United States, 204, 430,
Bowsher v. Synar, 372 435
Brown v. Board of Education, 206, 499
Buck v. Bell, 592 Landon v. Plasencia, 563
Lau v. Nichols, 85, 94, 499-503
Cabell v. Chavez-Salido, 564 League of United Latin American
Carino v. University of Oklahoma Board of Citizens v. Immigration and
Regents, 2 Naturalization Service, 506
Castañeda v. Pickard, 502 Lee Joe v. United States, 144-146
Chae Chan Ping v. United States, 144-146,
563 Marcello v. Bonds, 564
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 202 Martin Luther King, Jr., Elementary School
Cherokee Tobacco case, 202 Children v. Michigan Board of
Cheung Wong v. Immigration and Education, 501
Naturalization Service, 567 Mistretta v. United States, 372
Chew Heong v. United States, 144-146 Morrison v. Olson, 372
Chew v. Colding, 563
Chinese exclusion cases, 144-146 New York Indians v. United States, 202
Civil Rights cases, 205 Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization
Service, 571-572
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 699 Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 563
Northwest Arctic School District v. Califano,
Espinoza v. Farah Manufacturing Co., 502
565
Ex parte Endo, 430 Orantes-Hernandez v. Meese, 313
Ex parte Milligan, 430 Ozawa v. United States, 568, 576-579
Foley v. Connelie, 564 Passenger Cases, 309

Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 144-146, Plessy v. Ferguson, 205, 322, 439, 499
563 Plyler v. Doe, 565, 590-593
Fragante v. City and County of
Honolulu, 2 Schneider v. Rusk, 568
Schneiderman v. United States, 568
Galvan v. Press, 564 Scott v. Sandford, 592
Graham v. Richardson, 566 Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei,
563
Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 565 Slaughterhouse cases, 205
Head money cases, 309 Sugarman v. Dowell, 565
Hirabayashi v. United States, 429, 435 Sweatt v. Painter, 206
747
Index of Court Cases
Trop v. Dulles, 568 Wong Kim Ark case, 699-702

Truax v. Raich, 564 Wong Quan v. United States, 144-146
United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, Yasui v. United States, 430

563 Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 162, 564
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 567
United States v. Jung Ah Lung, 144-146 Zadvydas v. Davis, 711-712
United States v. Winans, 202
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 699-702
748
Index of Laws and Treaties
Act to Protect Free White Labor Civil Liberties Act of 1988, 436
Against Competition from Chinese Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1-2, 92, 201,
Coolie Labor of 1862 (California), 206, 499, 565
61 Constitution, U.S., 18, 444, 564, 570;
Agricultural Labor Relations Act, and alien rights, 294, 562; and
251 census, 121, 607; and citizenship,
Alien Act of 1798, 257-258, 319 164, 562; and English language, 218;
Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, 15-18, and Native Americans, 202; and
257-258 naturalization, 167, 570; and
Alien Enemies Act of 1798, 257-258 Proposition 187, 598-599; and
Alien Land Law of 1913 (California), slavery, 6, 201
19, 204, 433, 441, 576, 710; repeal Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, 181
of, 435
Alien Land Law of 1920 (California), Dawes Act of 1887, 166
21, 710 Declaratory Act of 1766 (Great
Alien land laws, 19-22, 578; in Britain), 165
California, 204, 433, 435, 441, 576, Deportation Act of 1929, 535
710 Displaced Persons Act of 1948, 355,
Alien Registration Act of 1940, 728 615-616; expiration of, 615
Amerasian Homecoming Act, 24
Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Elementary and Secondary Education
Penalty Act of 1996, 196 Act of 1965, 92-93
Emergency Quota Act of 1921, 346,
Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 85, 534
90-96, 501 Employment Equity Act of 1986
Border Security Act of 2001, 641 (Canada), 474
Burlingame Treaty, 109-113, 141-142 Enhanced Border Security and Visa
Entry Reform Act of 2002, 335
Cable Act of 1922, 113-115, 425 Equal Educational Opportunities Act
California; Agricultural Labor of 1974, 501
Relations Act of 1975 (California), Evacuation Claims Act of 1948, 429
254 Expropriation Act of 1907, 114
Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882,
140-144, 157, 274, 277, 321, 562, Fiancées Act of 1946, 683
608; amendment of, 136, 162, 204; Fifteenth Amendment, 205
and Border Patrol, 97; and Fifth Amendment, 294, 712; due
California nativists, 147, 154; and process clause, 712
congressional powers, 563; and First Amendment, 17, 563
exclusion cases, 144-146; Forant Act of 1885, 546
exemptions to, 349; and Japanese Fourteenth Amendment, 145, 162, 164,
immigrants, 432; renewal of, 112, 166, 205, 500, 699; and citizenship,
354, 709; repeal of, 353-356; and 700; equal protection clause, 205,
Wong Kim Ark case, 699-701 461, 564-566
Citizenship Act of 1924, 166 Fourth Amendment, 563, 566
749
Geary Act of 1892, 136, 143, 145, Immigration and Naturalization

157 Service, 97
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 19-20, Immigration Reform and Control Act
276-280, 433, 696, 710; and San of 1986, 62, 191, 336, 378, 383-387,
Francisco school segregation, 463, 532, 547; and au pairs, 84; and
441 employment, 492; revision of, 357
Guadalupe Hidalgo, Treaty of, 126, Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, 203
128, 484, 724 Indian Self-Determination and
Education Assistance Act, 203
Hart-Celler Act of 1965, 463 Internal Security Act of 1951,
Homeland Security Act of 2002, 173, 359
328; and illegal aliens, 335
Homestead Act of 1862, 632 Kennedy-Donnelly Act of 1988,
547
Illegal Immigration Reform and Ku Klux Klan Acts of 1870-1871,
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 478
1996, 196, 367, 378
Immigration Act of 1882, 240 Lindbergh law of 1934, 479
Immigration Act of 1903, 349 Luce-Celler Bill of 1946, 648
Immigration Act of 1917, 68, 339-343, McCreary Act of 1893, 145
546; and Asiatic Barred Zone, 190; Migration and Refugee Assistance Act
and head tax, 534 of 1962, 697
Immigration Act of 1921, 343-348, Mothers’ Aid Law of 1913, 646
352 Multiculturalism Act of 1988 (Canada),
Immigration Act of 1924 (National 194
Origins Act), 21, 42, 51, 123, 136, Mutual Security Act of 1951, 615
147, 244, 274, 322, 349-354, 463,
547, 694, 704; and Japanese, 578; National Genetic Diseases Act of 1976,
and trade unions, 587 706
Immigration Act of 1943, 163, 353-356, Nationality Act of 1870, 160
684 Naturalization Act of 1790, 568-570
Immigration Act of 1965, 322, 697 Naturalization Act of 1798, 16, 257-258;
Immigration Act of 1986; marriage repeal of, 18
fraud provision, 380, 524 Naturalization Act of 1802, 166
Immigration Act of 1990, 313, 356-358, Naval Clearing Act of 1962, 305
463 North American Free Trade
Immigration and Nationality Act of Agreement, 461, 733
1952 (McCarran-Walter Act), 24, 62,
322, 358-362, 377, 426, 463, 547, Oriental Exclusion Act of 1924, 682,
578, 677, 682, 684, 697; 684, 687
amendments of, 194; and Japanese
immigrants, 435; and West Indians, Page law of 1875, 579-583
417 Patriot Act of 2001, 641, 734; and
Immigration and Nationality Act of illegal aliens, 335
1965, 43, 68, 123, 148, 191, 352, 355, Poor Law Extension Act of 1847
362-366, 373, 378, 499, 547; (Great Britain), 396
amendment of, 384; and Korean Proposition 187 (California), 268, 461,
immigrants, 474 598-600, 602
750
Proposition 227 (California), 28, 85, Thirteenth Amendment, 166, 201, 205,
502, 532, 600-604 699
Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934, 728
Refugee Act of 1980, 179, 191, 311-313,
463, 620, 697 Virginia Charter of 1606, 165
Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 355, 361, Voting Rights Act of 1965, 401
548, 614-617 Voting Rights Act of 1975, 501
Scott Act of 1888, 143, 145, 157 War Brides Act of 1945, 355, 435, 614,
Sedition Act of 1798, 257-258 683, 685-688, 697
Sixth Amendment, 294 War Measures Act of 1942 (Canada),
Soldier Brides Act of 1947, 687 435
751
Index of Personages
Abbott, Edith, 646 Bradstreet, Anne, 507
Abourezk, James, 44 Breckinridge, Sophonisba, 646
Abraham, Spencer, 44, 47 Brennan, William Joseph, Jr., 566,
Achick, Tong K., 154 591-592
Adamic, Louis, 229 Breslin, Jimmy, 233
Adams, John, 16-17 Breyer, Stephen G., 712
Addams, Jane, 332-334, 646 Brimelow, Peter, 375
Anaya, Rudolfo, 509 Brownell, Herbert, 574
Anneke-Giesler, Mathilde Franziska, Bryan, William Jennings, 20
286 Buck, Pearl S., 22, 23
Anthony, Susan B., 286 Buffalo Hump, 286
Antin, Mary, 228 Burger, Warren E., 372, 501, 564,
Aoki, Shuzo, 278-279, 438-440 591-592
Arens, Richard, 359 Burlingame, Anson, 111
Aristide, Jean-Bertrand, 298-299, 301, Bush, George, 85, 298-299, 302, 436;
620 and Haiti, 620
Arthur, Chester A., 112, 142 Bush, George W.; and Homeland
As-sing, Norman, 153 Security Department, 328, 639; and
Atta, Mohammed, 641 Mexico, 335
Bailey, David, 581-582 Cable, John L., 113-115

Balaguer, Joaquín, 208 Cabot, John, 409
Baldwin, James, 510 Cadwalader, George, 31
Barolini, Helen, 233 Cahan, Abraham, 228
Barr, William P., 297 Callaghan, Morley, 510
Barry, Leonora, 696 Capra, Frank, 414
Barsimson, Jacob, 636 Caputo, Philip, 233
Barzun, Jacques, 216 Carmichael, Stokely, 691
Beck, Roy, 374 Carr, Matthew, 258
Bell, Thomas, 229 Carter, Jimmy, 486; and Mariel boatlift,
Bellow, Saul, 216, 230 525-527
Berkman, Alexander, 585 Castillo, Ana, 509
Bernstein, Robert L., 311 Castro, Fidel, 176-178, 180-181,
Bigler, John, 154 183-187, 247, 486, 512; and
Bjarni Herjolfsson, 630 González, Elián, 290-293; and Mariel
Black, Hugo L., 479 boatlift, 524-528
Blackmun, Harry A., 297, 501 Cather, Willa, 230, 508
Blyden, Edward, 691 Cédras, Raoul, 299
Bok, Edward, 229 Chadha, Jagdish, 371
Borjas, George, 375 Chávez, César, 128, 251-257
Box, John, 98, 101 Chen, Lily Lee, 132
Boyle, T. Coraghessan, 233 Cheunchijit, Rojana, 658-659
Bradford, William, 507 Chiang Kai-shek, 656
Bradshaw, Virginia, 659 Chiang Kai-shek, Madame, 354
753
Index of Personages
Chiles, Lawton M., Jr., 185, 267-269, Eaton, Edith Maud (Sui Sin Far), 57
394 Eaton, Winifred (Onoto Watanna),
Chin, Frank, 58 57
Chinda, Viscount, 19-20 Eisenhower, Dwight D., 361, 574, 616
Chisholm, Shirley, 691 Eliot, T. S., 510
Choephel, Ngavong, 660 Ellison, Ralph, 508
Chopin, Kate, 508 Escalante, Jaime, 602
Ciardi, John, 233 Escueta, Mel, 59
Cisneros, Sandra, 509
Cixi, 111 Fante, John, 233
Clark, Hugh, 32 Farrakhan, Louis, 62
Clarke, Edward Young, 479, 586 Farrell, James T., 232
Cleveland, Grover, 341, 344 Feinstein, Dianne, 269
Clinton, Bill, 182, 196, 302, 527, 620, Ferlinghetti, Lawrence, 233, 414
660; and Cuba, 184-187 Ferraro, Geraldine, 414
Clinton, Hillary Rodham, 556 Fillmore, Millard, 465
Cohn, Fannia, 272 Fitzgerald, F. Scott, 232, 510
Colt, LeBaron, 346 Flaherty, Joe, 233
Columbus, Christopher, 409 Ford, Gerald, 613
Cooke, Alistair, 216 Ford, Henry, 446
Coolidge, Calvin, 345, 704 Foster, Bill, 169-170
Crèvecœur, Michel-Guillaume-Jean de, Fox, Vicente, 335
507, 529 Frank, Leo, 446
Cronkite, Walter, 216 Frumkin, Robert, 457
Cruz, Philip Vera, 77 Fujimori, Albert, 437
Cummings, Samuel, 258 Fuller, Alvan T., 628
Fuller, Melville W., 701
Dalai Lama, 659-661
Daley, Richard J., 519 Gage, Henry, 709
Darwin, Charles, 560 Galarza, Ernesto, 252
Daugherty, James, 587 Gallagher, Tess, 233
Davenport, Charles B., 704 Gallatin, Albert, 17
Davis, Edward Bertrand, 268 Garvey, Marcus, 13, 417, 508, 667-670,
Davis, James J., 99 691
DeVoto, Bernard, 233 Gerstäcker, Friedrich, 286
Dillingham, William Paul, 344, 346 Gibran, Kahlil, 47
DiMaggio, Joe, 413 Gingrich, Newt, 269
DiPrima, Diane, 233 Gioia, Dana, 233
Doak, William N., 535-536 Gold, Michael, 230
Donato, Pietro di, 233 Goldman, Emma, 585
Donleavy, J. P., 233 Gonzáles, Rodolfo “Corky,” 128
Douglas, William O., 501 González, Elián, 290-293
D’Souza, Dinesh, 689 Gonzalez, M. C., 505
Duane, William, 17, 258 Gorbachev, Mikhail, 654
Dukakis, Michael, 629 Gordon, Mary, 233
Duke, David, 480 Gore, Al, 660
Dunne, Peter Finley, 231 Gotti, John, 413
Duvalier, François, 298, 301, 620 Grant, Madison, 345, 347, 554-555,
Duvalier, Jean-Claude, 298, 301 560
754
Index of Personages
Grant, Ulysses S., 445 Jackson, Jesse, 36

Graves, Earl, 691 James, Henry, 231, 510
Gray, Horace, 700 Jedlicka, Davor, 523
Green, John, 109 Jefferson, Thomas, 17-18, 410
Green, Rose Basile, 233 Johnson, Albert, 345-347
Green, William, 99 Johnson, Hiram Warren, 20
Guo Liang Chi, 140 Johnson, Lyndon B., 93, 320, 363; and
Gutiérrez, José Ángel, 128 bilingualism policy, 92-93; and
Cuba, 178; on Ku Klux Klan, 480
Hague, Frank, 519
Hakluyt, Richard, 507 Kahakua, James, 2
Hamill, Pete, 233 Kang, Younghill, 57
Hansen, Marcus Lee, 303 Kearney, Denis, 142, 349
Hanson, John, 631 Kennan, George, 277
Harding, Warren G., 345-346, 587 Kennedy, Anthony M., 571
Harlan, John Marshall, 701 Kennedy, Edward, 364
Harrison, Earl G., 615 Kennedy, John F., 127, 363, 399; A
Hauge, Hans Neilsen, 632 Nation of Immigrants, xiii
Hayakawa, S. I., 216 Kennedy, Robert F., 47, 253, 255,
Hayashi, Tadasu, 279-280 364
Hayes, Rutherford B., 112, 142 Kennedy, William, 232
Haywood, Bill, 588 Kenrick, Francis, 30
Hearst, William Randolph, 440 Kephart, William M., 523
Helton, Arthur C., 311 King, Martin Luther, Jr., 479
Hemingway, Ernest, 510 Kingston, Maxine Hong, 509
Henry, Patrick, 165 Kitazaki, George, 2
Himes, Chester, 510 König, Karin, 311
Hinojosa, Rolando, 509 Kosinski, Jerzy, 230
Hirohito, 687 Kramer, Samuel, 31
Hitler, Adolf, 446-447, 604, 704-705
Ho, Fred, 59 La Guardia, Fiorello, 414
Holder, Eric, 691 Larkin, Thomas Oliver, 115
Hoover, Herbert, 535 Lazarus, Emma, 225
Hoover, J. Edgar; and Palmer raids, Leif Eriksson, 630
585 Levin, Lewis, 30-32
Houdini, Harry (Erik Weisz), 213 Levy, Asser, 452
Howard, Maureen, 233 Lewisohn, Ludwig, 229
Howe, Harold, II, 92 Liliuokalani, 307
Howells, William Dean, 231 Lillo, Don De, 233
Hudspeth, Claude, 100 Lincoln, Abraham, 445
Huerta, Dolores, 251 Lodge, Henry Cabot, 340, 342, 344,
Hughes, Charles Evans, 97-98 350
Hughes, Langston, 508 Long, Huey, 519
Humphrey, Hubert H., 359 Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth,
Hunter, Evan, 233 508-509
Hwang, David Henry, 59 Loring, H. Sheldon, 581-582
Lotus Blossom, 57
I-Hsin, 111 Lucena, Abraham de, 452
Irving, Washington, 509 Lyon, Matthew, 17
755
Index of Personages
McCarran, Patrick, 359, 615 O’Neill, Eugene, 231-232

McCarthy, Mary, 232 Onoto Watanna (Winifred Eaton),
McKay, Claude, 417, 508, 691 57
McKinley, William, 344 Opechancanough, 421
McMichael, Morton, 31 Ortega, Daniel, 486
McVeigh, Timothy, 556 Ozawa, Takao, 568, 576-579
Malamud, Bernard, 230 Ozick, Cynthia, 230
Manasurangkun brothers, 657-659
Mandel, Ernest, 563 Page, Horace F., 580
Mandela, Nelson, 183 Pahlavi, Muhammad Reza, 392, 620
Mangione, Jerre, 233 Paine, Thomas, 507
Mao Zedong; and Taiwan, 656 Palmer, A. Mitchell, 584-589
Marciano, Rocky, 413 Park, Robert Ezra, 221
Marcos, Ferdinand, 620 Peerson, Cleng, 631
Marshall, James Wilson, 115 Peltason, Jack W., 600
Mason, Richard Barnes, 115 Pendergast, Tom, 519
Maximilian, Alexander Philipp, Penelas, Alex, 292
286 Phelan, James, 709
Meagher, Timothy, 169-170 Pinochet, Augusto, 620
Megapolensis, Dominie Johannes, Pocahontas, 421-422
451-452 Poe, Edgar Allan, 231
Meissner, Doris, 267-268 Poitier, Sidney, 691
Meusenbach, John, 286 Polk, James K., 115
Mezei, Ignatz, 563 Pound, Ezra, 510
Michlin, Arnold, 456 Powell, Lewis F., Jr., 372
Miller, Samuel F., 309 Powers, J. F., 233
Mitchell, George, 47 Powhatan, 421
Moore, Robert, 258 Puzo, Mario, 226, 233, 413
Mosby, John S., 581-582
Motley, Constance Baker, 691 Rabin, Yitzhak, 407
Mussolini, Benito, 510, 705 Rahall, Nick Joe, 44
Raleigh, Walter, 419
Nabokov, Vladimir, 230 Randall, Margaret, 196
Nader, Ralph, 371 Reagan, Ronald, 302, 384, 430, 552,
Nanak Dev, Guru, 647 620; and bilingual education, 85, 94;
Neale, Leonard, 258 and civil rights, 502; and Cuba, 527
Neier, Aryeh, 311 Rehnquist, William H., 372, 591
Newport, Christopher, 420 Reich, Robert B., 658
Nguyen, Tuan Anh, 571-572 Reno, Janet, 267-268; and Cuban
Noor, Queen, 47 refugees, 185, 290-293
Reynolds, James, 258
O’Connor, Edwin, 232 Ridge, Tom, 639
O’Connor, Flannery, 232 Riis, Jacob, 229
O’Connor, Sandra Day, 591 Rolfe, John, 422
O’Hara, Frank, 233 Rölvaag, O. E., 508
O’Hara, John, 232 Roosevelt, Eleanor, 615
Old Owl, 286 Roosevelt, Franklin D., 398, 520; and
Olsen, Tillie, 230 Japanese internment, 424, 426, 428,
O’Neill, Danny, 232 434, 710
756
Index of Personages
Roosevelt, Theodore, 277-278, 645; and Stevens, John Paul, 297

Japanese immigration, 279, 433, Strong, Josiah, 242
439, 441, 710; on language, 216 Stuyvesant, Peter, 443, 450-452, 636
Root, Elihu, 278-280, 438 Suar, Xavier, 183
Rosier, James, 419 Sugi, Suma, 425
Roth, Henry, 229 Sui Sin Far (Edith Maud Eaton), 57
Roth, Philip, 226 Sun Yat-sen, 141
Rusk, Dean, 364 Surial, H. G., 48
Sutter, John Augustus, 115
Sabath, Adolph, 346
Sacco, Nicola, 413, 626-629 Taft, William Howard, 19, 341,
St. John, J. Hector, 507, 529 344-345
Saionji, Kinmochi, 438 Talese, Gay, 233
Sandburg, Carl, 229 Tan, Amy, 59, 509
Santana, 286 Taney, Roger B., 592
Saroyan, William, 229-230 Taylor, Edward, 507
Scheuer, James H., 92 Thomas, Clarence, 207, 297
Schmitz, Eugene E., 440, 709 Thomas, Franklin, 691
Schneiderman, Rose, 272 Thoreau, Henry David, 231
Schwarzenegger, Arnold, 216, xiii Tien, Chang-lin, 600
Scott, Dred, 592, 699 Tijerina, Reies López, 128
Serra, Junípero, 316 Tingley, George B., 154
Seward, William Henry, 111, 283 Truman, Harry S., 359-361, 615, 687;
Shehhi, Marwan al-, 641 and European refugees, 322, 614
Shenouda III, Pope, 48 Tuchman, Gloria Matta, 602
Shepard, Charles R., 137 Twain, Mark, 510
Simmons, William J., 478 Tweed, “Boss” William Marcy, 519
Sinclair, Upton, 230, 507-508 Tz’u-hsi (Cixi), 111
Singer, Isaac Bashevis, 230
Sirhan, Sirhan Bishara, 47 Unz, Ron, 532, 601
Slocum, Tokutaro “Tokie” Nishimura,
426 Valachi, Joseph, 413
Smathers, George A., 178 Vang Pao, 324
Smith, Alfred E., 398-399, 663 Vanzetti, Bartolomeo, 413,
Smith, Betty, 232 626-629
Smith, H. T., 183 Verrazano, Giovanni da, 410
Smith, John, 420-422, 507 Vespucci, Amerigo, 409
Smith, Joseph, 221 Visel, Charles P., 536
Smith, Wayne, 525-526
Smythe, Thomas, 422 Walcott, Derek, 691
Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr, 230 Wales, J. A., 135
Somers, George, 422 Wallach, John, 457
Sousa, Mathias de, 636 Walter, Francis, 359
Sowell, Thomas, 552 Washington, Booker T., 668
Stalin, Joseph, 604 Washington, George, 505, 570
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, 286 West, Thomas, 422
Starr, Ellen Gates, 332-334 Wheatley, Phillis, 7, 507
Steele, Shelby, 552 White, Byron R., 372
Steinbeck, John, 508-509 White, John, 507
757
Index of Personages
Williams, Walter E., 552 Yamauchi, Wakako, 59

Wilson, Pete, 598, 601 Yarborough, Ralph Webster, 92-93
Wilson, Woodrow, 20, 341, 345-346, Yerby, Frank, 510
350, 727 Yezierska, Anzia, 229
Wingfield, Edward Maria, 420 Yoshikawa, Iwao, 577
Wong Kim Ark, 699-702 Young, Brigham, 221
Wong, Kent, 77
Wright, Luke E., 278-280 Zadvydas, Kestutis, 711-712
Wright, Richard, 510 Zangwill, Israel, 226, 530
758
Subject Index
AAJF. See American Arab and Jewish Agricultural Labor Relations Act, 251
Friends Agricultural Workers Organizing
AALDF. See Asian American Legal Committee, 251-252
Defense Fund Agriculture, 243, 384, 605; and British
AAUG. See Association of Arab immigrants, 107; European, 241,
American University Graduates 281, 316, 410, 445; and European
Abbott, Edith, 646 immigrants, 235, 281; and Filipino
Abourezk, James, 44 immigrants, 260; and Irish
Abraham, Spencer, 44, 47 immigrants, 403; and Jamaican
Acadia, 508 immigrants, 417; and Japanese
Accent discrimination, 1-3 immigrants, 19, 433, 439, 517; and
ACCESS. See Arab Community Center Mexican immigrants, 99, 101,
for Economic and Social Services 103-107, 191, 251-257, 572-573; and
Acculturation, 221, 530; of Arabs, 48; World War II, 103-107
and assimilation, 80; of Cubans, 630; Aid to Families with Dependent
of Dominicans, 209, 211; and ethnic Children, 698
enclaves, 273; generational, 273-276 AJC. See American Jewish Committee
Achick, Tong K., 154 Alabama; Clotilde slave ship, 168-171;
ACJ. See American Council on Judaism and Ku Klux Klan, 479-480
Act to Protect Free White Labor Alaska; Filipino immigrants, 280; gold
Against Competition from Chinese rush, 708; Native Americans,
Coolie Labor of 1862 (California), 123-124; Russian immigrants,
61 622-623; and U.S. Census, 123-124
Adamic, Louis, 229 Alianza Federal de Mercedes, La, 128
Adams, John, 16-17 Alien Act of 1798, 257-258, 319
ADC. See American-Arab Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, 15-18,
Anti-Discrimination Committee 257-258
Addams, Jane, 332-334, 646 Alien Enemies Act of 1798, 257-258
AFDC. See Aid to Families with Alien Land Law of 1913 (California),
Dependent Children 19, 204, 433, 441, 576, 710; repeal
Affirmative action, 121, 123, 206, of, 435
600-601; and immigrants, 9; and Alien Land Law of 1920 (California),
Latinos, 181; white resentment of, 21, 710
552 Alien land laws, 19-22, 578; in
AFL. See American Federation of Labor California, 204, 433, 435, 441, 576,
African Americans; and Cuban 710
immigrants, 180-184; and Irish Alien Registration Act of 1940, 728
immigrants, 400-401; and Korean Alien Registration Receipt (green)
immigrants, 469-472; stereotypes, Cards, 293-295
691 Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 566
African immigrants, 3-11 ALRA. See Agricultural Labor Relations
Afro-Caribbean immigrants, 6, 9, 11-15, Act
181; and Santería, 629-630 Amalgamated Clothing Workers, 271
Afroyim v. Rusk, 568 Ambach v. Norwick, 564
759
Subject Index
Amerasian Homecoming Act, 24 APA. See American Protective

Amerasians, 22-26; Vietnamese, 671 Association
American Arab and Jewish Friends, 456 APALA. See Asian Pacific American
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Labor Alliance
Committee, 36, 44-45 Arab Community Center for Economic
American Civil Liberties Union, 218, and Social Services, 36
314 Arab immigrants, 41-49; intergroup
American Council on Judaism, 615 relations, 33-38; and Jews, 454-458;
American Dream, 90, 344, 507; and stereotypes, 35, 38-42, 454
Chinese immigrants, 149; and Arab World and Islamic Resources and
European immigrants, 225; and School Services, 44
Irish immigrants, 398-399; in Arens, Richard, 359
literature, 59, 149, 226, 229, 233 Argentina, SS, 687
American Federation of Labor, 344 Aristide, Jean-Bertrand, 298-299, 301,
American Immigration Lawyers 620
Association, 381-382 Arizona; alien land laws, 21; and
American Indians. See Native Border Patrol, 97; illegal aliens, 335;
Americans Japanese immigrants, 204, 434;
American Jewish Committee, 26-27, Latinos, 505, 591, 610; and Mexican
615 War, 101, 484; Operation Wetback,
American Legion, 99, 585, 710 572-576; welfare system, 566
American Museum of Immigration, 225 Arkansas; alien land laws, 21;
American Party. See Know-Nothing discriminatory laws, 564; and
Party Operation Wetback, 574; refugee
American Protective Association, 344, detention camps, 526
350, 559 Armenians, 229
Amish, 284 Arthur, Chester A., 112, 142
Amnesty International, 298, 314 Ashkenazic Jews, 49-51, 405-406, 444,
Anabaptists, 285 452, 455, 637, 705
Anarchists, 319, 344, 349, 561, 568, Asian American Legal Defense Fund,
584; Goldman, Emma, 585; Sacco 56
and Vanzetti trial, 626-629 Asian Americans; advocacy
Anaya, Rudolfo, 509 organizations, 56, 76-79, 133-137,
Angel Island, 432, 434, 546, 696; 424-427; education, 52-55, 549-554;
opening of, 726 literature, 57-60; as “model
Anglican Church, 107 minorities,” 549-554; stereotypes, 52,
Anglo-conformity, 27-28, 319 60-63, 324, 553; women, 63-67
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Asian immigrants; and citizenship,
Service, 329 576-579, 648; mail-order brides, 522;
Anneke-Giesler, Mathilde Franziska, and Page law, 579-583. See also
286 individual ethnic groups
Anthony, Susan B., 286 Asian Indian immigrants, 67-71;
Anti-Defamation League, 446 demographics, 192; families, 72-76;
Anti-Irish Riots of 1844, 29-33, 559 and U.S. Census, 123
Antin, Mary, 228 Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance,
Anti-Popery Union, 559 76-79
Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Asiatic Barred Zone, 190, 359, 363
Penalty Act of 1996, 196 Asiatic Exclusion League, 19, 136, 277,
Aoki, Shuzo, 278-279, 438-440 709
760
Subject Index
Assimilation; and acculturation, 273; Bellow, Saul, 216, 230

and Anglo-conformity, 79-82; Berkman, Alexander, 585
differential, 691; and European Bernstein, Robert L., 311
Americans, 226; and European Bible, 30, 32, 404, 559
immigrants, 412; and “model Bigler, John, 154
minorities,” 551; and pluralism, 226; Bilingual education, 28, 85-96, 218,
processes, 237; and settlement 499-503; and Chicano movement,
houses, 644; theories, 79-83, 189, 128; and cultural pluralism, 189;
222, 228, 462 and Dominican immigrants, 209;
As-sing, Norman, 153 and English-only movement, 216;
Association of Arab American and generational acculturation, 275;
University Graduates, 40, 43 and Proposition 227, 600-604. See
Association of Immigration Attorneys, also Education
382 Bilingual Education Act of 1968, 85,
Asylum, 197-199; and Cubans, 13, 300, 90-96, 501
620; and Haitians, 13, 300, 302, 620; Birmingham church bombing, 479
and quotas, 380; and refugee Birth of a Nation (film), 478
fatigue, 612; and Salvadorans, 548; Bjarni Herjolfsson, 630
and Truman, Harry S., 322; and Black, Hugo L., 479
U.S. refugee policy, 310-315, 378, Blackmun, Harry A., 297, 501
381, 459, 614-616, 618-619 Blyden, Edward, 691
Atta, Mohammed, 641 Bohemians, 271; in literature, 230,
Au pairs, 84 508
Australia, 67, 607, 683 Bok, Edward, 229
Australian immigrants, 347, 352; Bolivians, 487
mail-order brides, 523 Border Patrol, U.S., 96-103, 328,
AWAIR. See Arab World and Islamic 367-368, 460; deportation power,
Resources and School Services 101; and Homeland Security
AWOC. See Agricultural Workers Department, 329; and illegal aliens,
Organizing Committee 335; and Operation Wetback,
Aztecs, 127, 483 574-575
Aztlán, 126 Border Security Act of 2001, 641
Borjas, George, 375
Bailey, David, 581-582 Boston; Chinatown, 131; Chinese
Balaguer, Joaquín, 208 immigrants, 136; Gypsy immigrants,
Baldwin, James, 510 296; Immigration Restriction
Baltic immigrants, 50, 242. See also League, 350; Irish immigrants, 398;
Lithuanian immigrants Italian immigrants, 410, 514; West
Baltimore, 131, 270 Indian immigrants, 689
Bangladeshi immigrants, 72 Bowsher v. Synar, 372
Baptist Church, 632 Box, John, 98, 101
Barolini, Helen, 233 Boyle, T. Coraghessan, 233
Barr, William P., 297 Bracero program, 103-107, 191, 252,
Barry, Leonora, 696 385; and Operation Wetback,
Barsimson, Jacob, 636 573-575; and unionization, 251-252,
Barzun, Jacques, 216 255
Beck, Roy, 374 Bradford, William, 507
Belize, 689 Bradshaw, Virginia, 659
Bell, Thomas, 229 Bradstreet, Anne, 507
761
Subject Index
Brazil, 50; African slaves, 484; black Americans, 64; Asian immigrants,
population, 609; Jewish settlers, 443, 69; and Border Patrol, 97;
450-451, 636 Chinatowns, 131-132; Chinese
Breckinridge, Sophonisba, 646 immigrants, 136, 155; Delano Grape
Brennan, William Joseph, Jr., 566, Strike, 128, 253, 255; Filipino
591-592 immigrants, 259-261, 264; gold rush,
Breslin, Jimmy, 233 115-119, 146, 151-156, 160; Hmong
Breyer, Stephen G., 712 immigrants, 324; illegal aliens, 335;
Brimelow, Peter, 375 Jamaican immigrants, 417; Japanese
British immigrants, 190, 194, 316; in immigrants, 277, 425, 431, 438-443,
Canada, 608; demographics, 192; as 709; Korean immigrants, 467, 544;
dominant group, 107-109; first and Ku Klux Klan, 480; Latinos, 128,
settlements, 316, 419-423; Gypsies, 505, 591, 610; Little Saigon, 54;
295; indentured servants, 388; Little Tokyos, 516; Mexican
Protestants, 235-236; and quotas, immigrants, 536; natural disasters,
191; war brides, 681-683 598; Operation Wetback, 572-576;
Brown v. Board of Education, 206, 499 Proposition 187, 268, 461, 598-600,
Brownell, Herbert, 574 602; Proposition 227, 28, 85, 502,
Bryan, William Jennings, 20 532, 600-604; segregation in, 278,
Buck, Pearl S., 22, 23 708; Sikh immigrants, 648;
Buck v. Bell, 592 Southeast Asian immigrants, 650;
Buddhism, 67; and Koreans, 468, 473, Taiwanese immigrants, 655; Thai
476; and Southeast Asians, 651; and garment workers, 657-659;
Vietnamese, 673 undocumented immigrants,
Buffalo Hump, 286 598-600; Vietnamese immigrants,
Burger, Warren E., 372, 501, 564, 672. See also Los Angeles; San
591-592 Francisco
Burlingame, Anson, 111 California, University of, 63, 600
Burlingame Treaty, 109-113, 141-142 Callaghan, Morley, 510
Burma, 324 Cambodia, 23-24, 526, 671
Bush, George, 85, 298-299, 302, 436; Cambodian immigrants, 53, 62, 64,
and Haiti, 620 649-650
Bush, George W.; and Homeland Canada; Arab immigrants, 33, 36; Asian
Security Department, 328, 639; and immigrants, 63-64, 67-68;
Mexico, 335 bilingualism, 89; borders, 97;
Chinatowns, 193; Chinese
Cabell v. Chavez-Salido, 564 immigrants, 155; Filipino
Cable, John L., 113-115 immigrants, 259, 264; and Japan,
Cable Act of 1922, 113-115, 425 193; Japanese immigrants, 62;
Cabot, John, 409 Japanese internment, 57, 517;
CACA. See Chinese American Citizens Korean immigrants, 474; Little
Alliance Tokyos, 517; Muslim immigrants,
Cadwalader, George, 31 557; Sikh immigrants, 648;
Cahan, Abraham, 228 Southeast Asian immigrants, 650;
California; Agricultural Labor and U.S. Border Patrol, 96, 98-99
Relations Act of 1975 (California), Canadian immigrants in the United
251, 254; alien land laws, 19-21; States, 192
Angel Island, 432, 434, 546, 696; Capra, Frank, 414
Arab immigrants, 34; Asian Caputo, Philip, 233
762
Subject Index
Carino v. University of Oklahoma Board 519; Mexican immigrants, 101, 536;

of Regents, 2 South Asian immigrants, 72
Carmichael, Stokely, 691 Chicago Immigrant Protective League,
Carr, Matthew, 258 697
Carter, Jimmy, 486; and Mariel boatlift, Chicano movement, 125-130
525-527 Chicanos. See Mexican immigrants
Castañeda v. Pickard, 502 Chile, 620
Castillo, Ana, 509 Chiles, Lawton M., Jr., 185, 267-269,
Castro, Fidel, 176-178, 180-181, 394
183-187, 247, 486, 512; and Chin, Frank, 58
González, Elián, 290-293; and China; and Burlingame Treaty,
Mariel boatlift, 524-528 109-113, 141-142; establishment of
Cather, Willa, 230, 508 People’s Republic, 355; and Great
CCBA (Chinese Consolidated Britain, 110, 146; Hmongs, 324; and
Benevolent Association). See Japan, 158; Nationalist government,
Chinese Six Companies 354; and Opium Wars, 146; Taiping
Cédras, Raoul, 299 Rebellion, 545; and Taiwan, 22, 656;
Celtic Irish, 119-120 and Tibet, 659-661; war brides, 681;
Censuses, U.S., 120-125; and slaves, 6. and World War II, 143, 148, 354,
See also Demographics 614. See also Taiwan
Center for Constitutional Rights, Chinatowns, 54, 130-133, 134, 355; and
313 generational acculturation, 273; in
Central Intelligence Agency, 324 literature, 57; and Little Tokyos,
Chadha, Jagdish, 371 517; Los Angeles, 160; San
Chae Chan Ping v. United States, 144-146, Francisco, 141, 147, 151-156, 158,
563 161-163; Vancouver, British
Chávez, César, 128, 251-257 Columbia, 193
Chen, Lily Lee, 132 Chinda, Viscount, 19-20
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 202 Chinese; and California gold rush,
Cherokee Tobacco case, 202 151-155; New York detentions,
Chesapeake Bay Colony, 5, 388, 138-140
419-420 Chinese American Citizens Alliance,
Cheunchijit, Rojana, 658-659 133-137
Cheung Wong v. Immigration and Chinese Americans; and education, 52;
Naturalization Service, 567 and U.S. Census, 123
Chew Heong v. United States, 144-146 Chinese Consolidated Benevolent
Chew v. Colding, 563 Association. See Chinese Six
Chiang Kai-shek, 656 Companies
Chiang Kai-shek, Madame, 354 Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882,
Chicago, 193; Arab immigrants, 36; 140-144, 157, 274, 277, 321, 562,
Asian Americans, 64; Chinatown, 608; amendment of, 136, 162, 204;
131; Chinese immigrants, 136; and Border Patrol, 97; and
Filipino immigrants, 261; garment California nativists, 147, 154; and
industry, 270-271; Gypsy immigrants, congressional powers, 563; and
296; Hull-House, 332-334, 644; Irish exclusion cases, 144-146;
immigrants, 398; Italian immigrants, exemptions to, 349; and Japanese
410, 514; Korean immigrants, 474; immigrants, 432; renewal of, 112,
in literature, 230, 232, 507; Little 354, 709; repeal of, 353-356; and
Tokyo, 518; machine politics, 399, Wong Kim Ark case, 699-701
763
Subject Index
Chinese exclusion cases, 144-146 Clinton, Bill, 182, 196, 302, 527, 620,
Chinese immigrants, 146-150, 354, 608, 660; and Cuba, 184-187
694; and California’s gold rush, Clinton, Hillary Rodham, 556
151-155; demographics, 192; Clotilde slave ship, 168-171
families, 155-160; and quotas, 347; Coast Guard, U.S., 172-174; and
stereotypes, 57, 137, 159. See also Chinese immigrants, 138-139; and
Taiwanese immigrants Cuban immigrants, 185, 187,
Chinese Six Companies (Chinese 290-293, 526; and Haitian boat
Consolidated Benevolent people, 297-300; and Homeland
Association), 135-136, 154, 160-163 Security Department, 330
Chinese stereotypes, 404; coolies, Cocaine, 172-173
174-176 Cohn, Fannia, 272
Chisholm, Shirley, 691 COINS, 123
Choephel, Ngavong, 660 Cold War, 599; and Cuban policy, 185
Chopin, Kate, 508 Colombia; drug traffic, 294; refugees
Church bill. See Refugee Relief Act of from, 487
1953 Colorado; anti-Chinese rioting, 134;
CIA. See Central Intelligence Agency Chinatowns, 131; Chinese
Ciardi, John, 233 immigrants, 136; Hmong
“Circular migration,” 491 immigrants, 324; Latinos, 128, 505,
Cisneros, Sandra, 509 610
Citizens’ Committee on Displaced Colt, LeBaron, 346
Persons, 615 “Columbia,” 236
Citizenship, 164-168; and Asians, Columbus, Christopher, 409
576-579, 648; and Cable Act, Community-oriented policing; and
113-115; and foreign parentage, illegal aliens, 336
571-572; and Fourteenth Compassion fatigue, 612-614
Amendment, 568, 700; and Native Connecticut; garment industry, 270;
Americans, 121, 166; naturalization Irish immigrants, 233; Jamaican
rules, 569-570; and Puerto Ricans, immigrants, 417; West Indian
196, 489; and war brides, 688 immigrants, 689, 691
Citizenship Act of 1924, 166 Constitution, U.S., 18, 444, 564, 570;
Citizenship and Immigration Services, and alien rights, 294, 562; and
U.S., 328, 335, 369, 641 census, 121, 607; and citizenship,
Civil Liberties Act of 1988, 436 164, 562; and English language, 218;
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1-2, 92, 201, and Native Americans, 202; and
206, 499, 565 naturalization, 167, 570; and
Civil Rights cases, 205 Proposition 187, 598-599; and
Civil War, U.S., 111, 281, 320; German slavery, 6, 201. See also individual
immigrants in, 286; Irish in, 400; amendments
and Jews, 445; and Ku Klux Klan, Cooke, Alistair, 216
477; Scotch-Irish immigrants in, Coolidge, Calvin, 345, 704
635; and slavery, 7 Coolies, 61, 141, 174-176, 699; and
Cixi, 111 Page law, 580; and stereotypes,
CLAO. See Council of Lebanese 159
American Organizations Costa Rica, 525, 668, 677
Clark, Hugh, 32 Cotton farming, 97, 99, 483;
Clarke, Edward Young, 479, 586 mechanization of, 605; and
Cleveland, Grover, 341, 344 slavery, 6
764
Subject Index
Council of Lebanese American Americans, 33-34, 44, 454-455; Asian

Organizations, 45 Americans, 52, 63; and Chinatowns,
Crèvecœur, Michel-Guillaume-Jean de, 132; Chinese immigrants, 146;
507, 529 Dominican immigrants, 208;
Crimean War, 281 European immigrants, 225, 281;
Criminal law, 367; and deportation, Filipino immigrants, 261; illegal
198-199, 381, 564; and hate crime, aliens, 334; immigrants, 638, 641;
45; and Hmong marriages, 326; and Indian and Pakistani immigrants,
illegal aliens, 20, 334-336, 368, 385, 72; Israeli immigrants, 405-406, 408;
526; and immigration, 240, 294, Italian immigrants, 409, 514;
677, 680; and Ku Klux Klan, 479; Jamaican immigrants, 417; Japanese
and youth gangs, 500 immigrants, 277; Jewish immigrants,
Cronkite, Walter, 216 50, 454; Korean immigrants, 467,
Cruz, Philip Vera, 77 470, 474; Latinos, 489, 496, 533;
Cuba; and González, Elián, 290-293; Pacific islanders, 305; Southeast
and Mariel boatlift, 524-528; Asian immigrants, 650, 672; trends,
Santería, 629-630 606-612; Vietnamese immigrants,
Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, 181 672. See also Censuses, U.S.
Cuban immigrants, 176-180, 489; and Denmark, 229, 318
African Americans, 180-184; Deportation, 195-200, 384, 562-563,
businesses, 247, 512-514; and U.S. 711-712; and Alien Act, 16; of Arabs,
Census, 123; demographics, 192; 46; and Border Patrol, U.S., 101; of
deportation of, 181, 527; families, Chinese, 145, 157; and communists,
494, 496; and Haitians, 14; holidays, 357; of Cubans, 181, 527; of Garvey,
498; and immigration law, 384, 386, Marcus, 669; of Haitians, 181, 302;
697; and Little Havana, 512-514; as of illegal aliens, 294, 336-337; and
“model minority,” 550; stereotypes, Immigration and Naturalization
527; and U.S. refugee policy, Service, 367-368; and immigration
184-187 law, 377-378, 380-382; and literary
Cultural pluralism, 188-190, 215, 218, tests, 342; of Mexicans, 106, 127,
273, 644 533-537, 572-576; and Operation
Cummings, Samuel, 258 Wetback, 106; Palmer raids, 584-589;
Customs and Border Protection, 97 and Patriot Act, 641; rates, 167; of
refugees, 310-312, 548, 618, 620;
Dalai Lama, 659-661 and terrorist attacks, 642; and war
Daley, Richard J., 519 brides, 683, 687
Darwin, Charles, 560 Deportation Act of 1929, 535
Daugherty, James, 587 Depression era, 191, 319, 572, 596, 697;
Davenport, Charles B., 704 and Asian Indian immigrants, 68;
Davis, Edward Bertrand, 268 and Canada, 194; Dust Bowl
Davis, James J., 99 migrants, 253; and Jews, 446; in
Dawes Act of 1887, 166 literature, 508; and machine
Declaration of Independence, 201 politics, 520; Mexican deportations,
Declaratory Act of 1766 (Great 127, 533-537; trade unions, 61
Britain), 165 Detroit, 183, 456; Arab immigrants, 34,
Delano Grape Strike, 128, 253, 255 36, 41-42, 47, 455, 610; Chinese
Delaware; Iranian immigrants, 394 immigrants, 136; Ford Motor
Demographics, 120-125, 190-195, Company English school, 224;
373-374; Africans, 6; Arab Maronite immigrants, 48; Mexican
765
Subject Index
immigrants, 536; police brutality in, Donleavy, J. P., 233

183 Douay Bible, 30
DeVoto, Bernard, 233 Douglas, William O., 501
Dillingham, William Paul, 344, 346 Dps. See Displaced persons
Dillingham Commission, 244, 349, 543 Dred Scott v. Sandford, 699
DiMaggio, Joe, 413 Drug traffic; and Coast Guard, U.S., 172
DiPrima, Diane, 233 D’Souza, Dinesh, 689
Disasters, 310, 327-328; in California, Duane, William, 17, 258
598; and Homeland Security Dukakis, Michael, 629
Department, 329 Duke, David, 480
Discrimination, 201-207, 412, 551-552, Dunne, Peter Finley, 231
564-565; and accents, 1-3; and Dust Bowl, 253
acculturation, 275; vs. Afro- Dutch immigrants, 107, 225, 235, 318,
Caribbeans, 13-14; alien land laws, 544
19-22; vs. Arab Americans, 36, 40, Dutch West India Company, 443,
42-44, 454; vs. Asian Americans, 56, 450-452, 636
65, 77, 319, 321-322; vs. Chinese, 61, Duvalier, François, 298, 301, 620
132, 136, 140-147, 154, 156, 158, Duvalier, Jean-Claude, 298, 301
161; and civil rights laws, 499; vs.
Cuban immigrants, 526-527; vs. Eastern European Jewish immigrants.
Dominican immigrants, 210; and See Jewish immigrants, Eastern
ethnic enclaves, 219-222, 708; vs. European
European immigrants, 561; vs. Eaton, Edith Maud (Sui Sin Far), 57
Filipino immigrants, 263; vs. Eaton, Winifred (Onoto Watanna), 57
Haitians, 302; vs. Hawaiians, 306; Ebonics, 602
and immigration law, 261, 344, 364, EBPSUSA. See El Bireh Palestine
386, 568, 614, 618; vs. Iranians, 394; Society of the USA
vs. Irish immigrants, 231, 235, 400, Ecuador, 91
402-403; vs. Japanese immigrants, Education, 247, 460-461, 565-566; and
424, 431, 438-443; vs. Jews, 445-446; Amerasians, 25; and Arab
vs. Latinos, 492, 504-505; in Americans, 35, 43-45; and Asian
literature, 57; vs. Mexican Americans, 52-55, 64-65, 69-70, 74,
immigrants, 104, 126-127, 532-537, 77, 549-554; and assimilation, 82,
666; vs. Polish Americans, 597; vs. 275; and Chinese, 158-159; and
war brides, 685; vs. women cultural pluralism, 189; and
immigrants, 695, 697 discrimination, 206; and Hmongs,
Disney Company, 661 53-54, 62, 325; and illegal aliens,
Displaced persons, 359, 594, 614-617 590-593; and immigration policy,
Displaced Persons Act of 1948, 355, 191, 194; and Jamaicans, 417-418;
615-616; expiration of, 615 and Japanese, 278, 438-443, 708;
Displaced Persons Commission, 615 and Koreans, 468, 474; and
Doak, William N., 535-536 Laotians, 54; and Latinos, 491, 494,
Domestic Preparedness, Office of, 329 506; and “model minorities,” 550,
Dominican immigrants, 207-211, 247, 552-553; and Pacific islanders, 305,
375, 494; families, 496; holidays, 307; and Roman Catholic Church,
498; and Puerto Ricans, 210; and 238; and Scandinavians, 238; and
Puerto Rico, 486 Taiwanese, 655; teachers, 238; and
Dominican Republic, 13, 484, 486 Vietnamese, 675; and West Indians,
Donato, Pietro di, 233 689. See also Bilingual education
766
Subject Index
EEOC. See Equal Employment Ethiopian immigrants, 8, 312, 551

Opportunity Commission Ethiopian Jews, 540
Eisenhower, Dwight D., 361, 574, 616 Ethnic enclaves, 66, 90, 219-222, 344,
El Bireh Palestine Society of the USA, 618; and acculturation, 273;
45 Afro-Caribbean, 14; Asian, 62;
El Salvadoran immigrants, 193, 313, Chinese, 130-133; Cuban, 492,
548, 619-620 512-514; and discrimination, 708;
Elementary and Secondary Education Irish, 398; Italian, 412, 514-516;
Act of 1965, 92-93 Japanese, 516-518, 708; Jewish, 50;
Eliot, T. S., 510 Swedish, 631; West Indian, 689. See
Ellis Island, ii, xxvi, 225, 241-242, 318, also Chinatowns; Koreatowns; Little
352, 363, 544, 563; closing of, 244; Havana; Little Italies; Little
creation of reception center, 235, Jerusalem; Little Saigon; Little
240; detention pen, 197; health Tokyos
inspectors, 317 Eugenics movement, 322, 345, 347,
Ellison, Ralph, 508 560, 702-707
Emergency Quota Act of 1921, 346, Euro-Americans, 222-224
534 European immigrants, 235-245; family
Employment Equity Act of 1986 businesses, 247; literature, 224-234;
(Canada), 474 and U.S. policy, 340, 349, 352, 359.
English as a second language, 87, 501, See also individual nationalities
545 Evacuation Claims Act of 1948, 429
English language, 107, 375, 462; and Ex parte Endo, 430
accent discrimination, 1-3; and Ex parte Milligan, 430
Anglo-American conformity, 28; and Executive Order 9066, 424, 426, 428,
assimilation, 80, 82; and bilingual 430, 434, 710
education, 85-96, 499-503; Expropriation Act of 1907, 114
development programs, 87; and
Filipinos, 263; and Japanese, 440; FAA. See Federal Aviation
and Latinos, 484, 492; and Administration
mail-order brides, 523; in Falasha Jews, 540
Philippines, 259; and settlement Family businesses, 246-250; Jewish, 454;
houses, 644; and war brides, 685. See Korean, 469-472; Pacific islanders,
also Languages 308
English-only and official English FAN. See Feminist Arab Network
movements, 214-219 Fante, John, 233
English Plus, 218 Farm Workers Association. See National
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Farm Workers Association
Entry Reform Act of 2002, 335 Farmworkers’ union, 251-257
Equal Educational Opportunities Act Farrakhan, Louis, 62
of 1974, 501 Farrell, James T., 232
Equal Employment Opportunity FBI. See Federal Bureau of Investigation
Commission, 201 Federal Aviation Administration, 46
Escalante, Jaime, 602 Federal Bureau of Investigation, 45,
Escueta, Mel, 59 428, 479, 585
Eskimos, 123, 609 Federal Emergency Management
ESL. See English as a second language Agency, 328-329
Espinoza v. Farah Manufacturing Co., Federal Law Enforcement Training
565 Center, 329
767
Subject Index
Federal Protective Service, 329 205, 461, 564-566, 590; and

Federal riot of 1799, 257-258 segregation, 499
Feinstein, Dianne, 269 Fourth Amendment, 563, 566
Feminist Arab Network, 36 Fox, Vicente, 335
Ferlinghetti, Lawrence, 233, 414 Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu, 2
Ferraro, Geraldine, 414 France, 628; and Alien and Sedition
Fiancées Act of 1946, 683 Acts, 15-18; citizenship in, 23;
Fifteenth Amendment, 205 Gypsies, 295
Fifth Amendment, 294, 712; due Frank, Leo, 446
process clause, 712 French Canadians, 508
Fiji, 67 French immigrants, 225, 295, 318, 507,
Filipino immigrants, 258-264; and 529, 544
citizenship, 61; demographics, 192; Frumkin, Robert, 457
families, 264-267; and Gentlemen’s Fujimori, Albert, 437
Agreement, 280; mail-order brides, Fuller, Alvan T., 628
522; and U.S. Census, 123, 261; war Fuller, Melville W., 701
brides, 685. See also Philippines
Fillmore, Millard, 465 Gage, Henry, 709
Films; and Arab stereotypes, 40; and Galarza, Ernesto, 252
Chinese stereotypes, 137; and Italian Gallagher, Tess, 233
stereotypes, 413 Gallatin, Albert, 17
Finns, 634 Galvan v. Press, 564
First Amendment, 17, 563 Garment industry, 71, 76, 213, 270-272;
Fitzgerald, F. Scott, 232, 510 Thai worker enslavement, 657-659;
Flaherty, Joe, 233 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire,
Florida; bilingual education, 91; citrus 661-663; and women, 697-698
industry, 241; Cuban immigrants, Garvey, Marcus, 13, 417, 508, 667-670,
176-177, 179-184, 247, 375, 512-514, 691
524-528; Dominican immigrants, Geary Act of 1892, 136, 143, 145, 157
208; and González, Elián, 290-293; General Trades Union of Philadelphia,
Haitian immigrants, 181, 300, 302; 29-30
illegal-immigrant suit, 267-269; Generational acculturation, 273-276
Iranian immigrants, 394; Jamaican Gentlemen’s Agreement, 19-20,
immigrants, 417; Latinos, 610; 276-280, 433, 696, 710; and San
Spanish settlements, 316, 610; Francisco school segregation, 441
Vietnamese immigrants, 672. See also Georgia, 183; Gypsy immigrants, 296;
Miami and Ku Klux Klan, 478-479;
Flower Drum Song (Rodgers and lynching, 446; slavery, 286
Hammerstein), 131 German American Alliance, 287
Foley v. Connelie, 564 German immigrants, 235, 281-290; and
Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 144-146, alcohol, 236; demographics, 192;
563 language, 216; and Native
Forant Act of 1885, 546 Americans, 286; and slavery, 286;
Ford, Gerald, 613 stereotypes, 545
Ford, Henry, 446 Gerstäcker, Friedrich, 286
Foster, Bill, 169-170 Ghadr Party, 648
Fourteenth Amendment, 145, 162, 164, Ghettos. See Ethnic enclaves
166, 205, 500, 699; and citizenship, Gibran, Kahlil, 47
568, 700; equal protection clause, Gingrich, Newt, 269
768
Subject Index
Gioia, Dana, 233 Haitian immigrants, 8-9, 300-303; boat

Gitanos (Gypsies), 296 people, 9, 297-300; and Cubans, 14;
Godfather, The (Puzo), 226, 413 deportation of, 181, 302; and
Gold, Michael, 230 immigration law, 386
Gold rush, Alaska, 708 Hakluyt, Richard, 507
Gold rush, California, 115-119, 146, Hamill, Pete, 233
156, 160; and Chinese immigrants, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 565
151-155 Hansen, Marcus Lee, 303
Goldman, Emma, 585 Hansen effect, 303-304
Gonzaga University, 24 Hanson, John, 631
Gonzáles, Rodolfo “Corky,” 128 Harding, Warren G., 345-346, 587
González, Elián, 290-293 Harlan, John Marshall, 701
Gonzalez, M. C., 505 Harlem Renaissance, 417, 508
Gorbachev, Mikhail, 654 Harrison, Earl G., 615
Gordon, Mary, 233 Hart-Celler Act of 1965, 463
Gore, Al, 660 Hate crime; and Arabs, 35, 44-45; and
Gotti, John, 413 Muslims, 556
Graham v. Richardson, 566 Hauge, Hans Neilsen, 632
Grant, Madison, 345, 347, 554-555, 560 Haugeans, 632
Grant, Ulysses S., 445 Hawaii, 304-308; Asian Americans, 64;
Graves, Earl, 691 Chinese immigrants, 155; English
Gray, Horace, 700 language in, 1-2; Filipino
Great Britain; and China, 110, 146; immigrants, 2, 259, 261, 264; and
colonial influence of, 107-109; Gentlemen’s Agreement, 279; and
Declaratory Act of 1766, 165; and Immigration Act of 1943, 354;
Jamaica, 416; Poor Law Extension indigenous population, 123;
Act of 1847, 396; and slave trade, 6, Japanese immigrants, 277, 279, 425,
169; and XYZ affair, 15 431; Korean immigrants, 473-474,
Green, John, 109 544; and Native Americans, 124;
Green, Rose Basile, 233 Ozawa v. United States, 576-579;
Green, William, 99 picture brides, 589-590; sugar
Green cards, 293-295, 379-380 industry, 260, 277, 439, 473; and
GTU. See General Trades Union of U.S. Census, 123
Philadelphia Hayakawa, S. I., 216
Guadalupe Hidalgo, Treaty of, 126, Hayashi, Tadasu, 279-280
128, 484, 724 Hayes, Rutherford B., 112, 142
Guadeloupe, 9 Haywood, Bill, 588
Guam, 305, 485 Head money cases, 309
Guatemala, 484; refugees from, Head taxes, 100-101, 309, 534-535
312-313, 619-620; schools, 91 Hearst, William Randolph, 440
Guatemalan immigrants, 193 Helsinki Watch, 310-315
Guo Liang Chi, 140 Helton, Arthur C., 311
Gutiérrez, José Ángel, 128 Hemingway, Ernest, 510
Guyana, 13, 630, 689 Henry, Patrick, 165
Gypsy immigrants, 295-297; stereotypes, Himes, Chester, 510
296 “Hindoo” conspiracy trials, 648
Hinojosa, Rolando, 509
Hague, Frank, 519 Hirabayashi v. United States, 429, 435
Haiti, 620; U.S. occupation of, 8 Hirohito, 687
769
Subject Index
Hispanics. See Cuban immigrants; immigration law, 383-387; and

Dominican immigrants; Latinos; Operation Wetback, 572-576; and
Mexican immigrants; Puerto Ricans Page law, 579-583; and refugees, 619
Hitler, Adolf, 446-447, 604, 704-705 Illegal Immigration Reform and
Hmong immigrants, 64, 324-327, 552, Immigrant Responsibility Act of
650, 652, 671; and education, 53-54, 1996, 196, 367, 378
62; families, 650-651 Illinois; Asian Americans, 64; Asian
Ho, Fred, 59 Indian immigrants, 69; Chinese
Holder, Eric, 691 immigrants, 155; Japanese
Holocaust, 455, 463, 604, 614 immigrants, 425; Korean
Homeland Security Act of 2002, 173, immigrants, 467; Latinos, 610;
328; and illegal aliens, 335 Mexican immigrants, 101; and
Homeland Security Department, Operation Wetback, 574. See also
327-332, 335, 369; and Border Chicago
Patrol, U.S., 96, 335; and Coast Immigrant advantage, 338-339
Guard, U.S., 172-174; creation of, Immigration; and Coast Guard, U.S.,
639 172; and Homeland Security
Homestead Act of 1862, 632 Department, 328; and illegal aliens,
Hoover, Herbert, 535 334-338
Hoover, J. Edgar; and Palmer raids, 585 Immigration Act of 1882, 240
Houdini, Harry (Erik Weisz), 213 Immigration Act of 1903, 349
Howard, Maureen, 233 Immigration Act of 1907, 710
Howe, Harold, II, 92 Immigration Act of 1917, 68, 339-343,
Howells, William Dean, 231 546; and Asiatic Barred Zone, 190;
Hudspeth, Claude, 100 and head tax, 534
Huerta, Dolores, 251 Immigration Act of 1921, 343-348, 352
Hughes, Charles Evans, 97-98 Immigration Act of 1924 (National
Hughes, Langston, 508 Origins Act), 21, 42, 51, 123, 136,
Huguenots, 544 147, 244, 274, 322, 349-353, 463,
Hull-House, 332-334; cooking class, 644 547, 694, 704; and Japanese, 578;
Human Rights Watch, 310 and trade unions, 587
Humphrey, Hubert H., 359 Immigration Act of 1943, 163, 353-356,
Hungarian immigrants, 50, 224, 543, 684
616, 693 Immigration Act of 1965, 322, 697
Hunter, Evan, 233 Immigration Act of 1986; marriage
Hutterites, 285 fraud provision, 380, 524
Hwang, David Henry, 59 Immigration Act of 1990, 313, 356-358,
463
I-Hsin, 111 Immigration and Customs
ICEM. See Intergovernmental Enforcement, Bureau of, 369
Committee for European Migration Immigration and Nationality Act of
Idaho; alien land laws, 21; Chinatowns, 1952 (McCarran-Walter Act), 24, 62,
131; English-only movement, 585 322, 358-362, 377, 426, 463, 547,
ILGWU. See International Ladies’ 578, 677, 682, 684, 697;
Garment Workers’ Union amendments of, 194; and Japanese
Illegal aliens. See Illegal immigration immigrants, 435; and West Indians,
Illegal immigration, 334-338, 372-376, 417
378, 533-537, 665-666; and Immigration and Nationality Act of
education, 590-593; and 1965, 43, 68, 123, 148, 191, 352, 355,
770
Subject Index
362-366, 373, 378, 499, 547; Industrial Workers of the World,

amendment of, 384; and Korean 587-588
immigrants, 474; and Taiwanese, INS. See Immigration and
655 Naturalization Service
Immigration and Naturalization Institute for Palestine Studies, 45
Service, 97, 312-313, 334-338, Intergovernmental Committee for
366-371, 506, 574; and Florida European Migration, 616
illegal-immigrant suit, 267-269; and Internal Security Act of 1951, 359
green cards, 293; and Homeland International Ladies’ Garment
Security Department, 640; Workers’ Union, 271, 662, 697
Operation Wetback, 572-576; International Red Cross. See Red Cross
reorganization of, 335; and Thai International Refugee Organization,
garment workers, 657-659 615-616
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. IPS. See Institute for Palestine Studies
Chadha, 371-372 Iran, 620
Immigration Commission, United Iranian immigrants, 392-395
States, 344, 349 IRCA. See Immigration Reform and
Immigration “crisis,” 372-376 Control Act of 1986
Immigration history, 316-323 Irish immigrants, 119-120, 236,
Immigration law, 376-383; and 281-284, 318, 395-400, 543; and
deportation, 195-200, 377-378, African Americans, 400-401; and
380-382; and discrimination, 344, alcohol, 236; demographics,
364, 386, 568, 614, 618; and terrorist 225-226, 235; and discrimination,
attacks, 641 402; employment of, 238; and
Immigration quotas. See Quotas Federal riot of 1799, 257-258; and
Immigration Reform and Control Act immigration law, 340; and nativism,
of 1986, 62, 191, 336, 378, 383-387, 29-33, 559; persecution of, 320; and
463, 532, 547; and au pairs, 84; and Philadelphia riots, 29-33; and Poles,
employment, 492; revision of, 357 594; prejudice against, 320; and
Immigration Restriction League, 344, Roman Catholic Church, 29-33, 402,
350 559; Scotch-Irish, 107, 120, 235, 402,
Indentured servitude, 387-390; and 635-636; and slavery, 237, 400;
African immigrants, 483, 609; and stereotypes, 282, 399, 403-405, 545;
Asian immigrants, 67; and British women, 696
immigrants, 317; and Chinese Irish riot. See Federal riot of 1799
immigrants, 133, 139, 699; and IRO. See International Refugee
English immigrants, 107; and Organization
slavery, 4; and women, 695 Irving, Washington, 509
Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, 203 Israel; and American Jewish
Indian Self-Determination and Committee, 26; and American Jews,
Education Assistance Act, 203 448, 455-457; and Arab Americans,
Indiana, 101 41-42, 46-47, 455-457; and Falasha
Indians. See Asian Indian immigrants; Jews, 540; and Israeli Americans,
Native Americans 405-409; and Russian Jews, 625, 653
Indians, American. See Native Israeli immigrants, 405-409;
Americans stereotypes, 407. See also Jewish
Indigenous superordination, immigrants
391-392 Italian immigrants, 409-415;
Indonesia, 612 businesses, 514-516; demographics,
771
Subject Index
192; Little Italies, 514-516; and 61; and U.S. citizenship, 576-579;
“mongrelization,” 555; and nativism, women, 696; and “yellow peril”
560; stereotypes, 226, 409, 414 campaign, 707-711
Italy, 628 Japanese Peruvians, 437-438
IWW. See Industrial Workers of the Japantowns. See Little Tokyos
World JDL. See Jewish Defense League
JDO. See Jewish Defense Organization
Jackson, Jesse, 36 Jedlicka, Davor, 523
JACL. See Japanese American Citizens Jefferson, Thomas, 17-18, 410
League Jewish Defense League, 457-458
Jamaica, 363; Rastafarian movement, Jewish Defense Organization, 457
13 Jewish immigrants, 443-449; advocacy
Jamaican immigrants, 9, 181, 247-248, organizations, 26-27; and Arab
415-419; and education, 417, 418; Americans, 454-458; Ashkenazic,
Garvey, Marcus, 667; and Santería, 49-51, 405-406, 444, 452, 455, 637,
630 705; and Canadian immigration
James, Henry, 231, 510 policy, 194; Eastern European,
Jamestown colony, 4, 410, 419-423 212-214; Ethiopian, 540; garment
Japan; and Amerasian children, 23-24; workers, 271; and generational
and Canada, 193; and China, 158; acculturation, 273; German, 282,
and Gentlemen’s Agreement, 19, 284-285; intermarriage of, 82;
276-280, 433, 441, 710; and Russia, Israeli, 405-409; and Ku Klux Klan,
709; U.S. air bases in, 22; U.S. 479, 586; literature of, 226, 228-230;
occupation of, 22; and World War II, and “mongrelization,” 555; and
62, 437 nativism, 560; prejudice against,
Japanese American Citizens League, 236; and Roman Catholic Church,
424-427, 710 636; Russian, 604, 622-623, 625,
Japanese American internment, 62, 653-655; Sephardic, 34, 405, 408,
321, 427-430, 431-432, 437; in 444, 452, 454-455, 636-637;
fiction, 57; and Japanese Peruvians, settlement of New York, 449-453;
437-438; and Little Tokyos, 517 stereotypes, 446; and U.S.
Japanese Americans; businesses, immigration policy, 614. See also
516-518; and education, 52; and Israeli immigrants
generational acculturation, 274; as Johnson, Albert, 345-347
“model minority,” 550; and U.S. Johnson, Hiram Warren, 20
Census, 123 Johnson, Lyndon B., 93, 320, 363; and
Japanese and Korean Exclusion bilingualism policy, 92-93; and
League, 277-278, 709 Cuba, 178; on Ku Klux Klan, 480
Japanese Exclusion League, 440-441 Johnson-Reid Act. See Immigration Act
Japanese immigrants, 321, 431-436, of 1924
694; in Canada, 517; and education, Joy Luck Club, The (Tan), 59, 509
278, 438-443; generational Jungle, The (Sinclair), 230, 507
acculturation, 685; and Hawaiian Justice and immigration, 458-464
sugar industry, 277; and
immigration policy, 349; Little Kahakua, James, 2
Tokyos, 516-518; and picture brides, Kang, Younghill, 57
589-590; and quotas, 347; Kansas, 21
segregation in California schools, Kearney, Denis, 142, 349
278, 438-443, 708; stereotypes, 57, Kennan, George, 277
772
Subject Index
Kennedy, Anthony M., 571 Pacific islanders, 306; Polish, 594;

Kennedy, Edward, 364 Scandinavian, 632; Spanish, 1, 316;
Kennedy, John F., 127, 363, 399; A and Taiwanese immigrants, 655; and
Nation of Immigrants, xiii war brides, 684-685. See also English
Kennedy, Robert F., 47, 253, 255, 364 language
Kennedy, William, 232 Laos; Amerasians, 24; Hmongs, 324;
Kennedy-Donnelly Act of 1988, 547 and Vietnam War, 324
Kenrick, Francis, 30 Laotian immigrants, 62, 64, 620,
Kent State University, 457 649-650; and education, 54;
Kentucky, 287 Hmongs, 324-327
Kephart, William M., 523 Larkin, Thomas Oliver, 115
Khmer, 671 Latinos, 481-488; advocacy
King, Martin Luther, Jr., 479 organizations, 503-507, 531-533; and
Kingston, Maxine Hong, 509 education, 491, 494, 506;
Kitazaki, George, 2 employment, 488-493; families,
KKK. See Ku Klux Klan 494-499; and Roman Catholic
Know-Nothing Party, 32, 136, 283, 320, Church, 497; stereotypes, 497. See
465 also individual ethnic groups
König, Karin, 311 Lau v. Nichols, 85, 94, 499-503
Korean immigrants, 192, 466-469, 544; Law. See individual acts and Immigration
and African Americans, 469-472; in law
Canada, 474; and education, 468, Lazarus, Emma, 225
474; families, 473-477 League of United Latin American
Korean War; and Amerasian children, Citizens, 503-507
22, 24; and Korean immigration, League of United Latin American
473; and war brides, 681, 685 Citizens v. Immigration and
Koreatowns, 66, 466, 474 Naturalization Service, 506
Korematsu v. United States, 204, 430, League of Women Voters, 426
435 Lebanon, 39, 42, 44-48, 454; civil war,
Kosinski, Jerzy, 230 545
Kramer, Samuel, 31 Lee Joe v. United States, 144-146
Ku Klux Klan, 477-481 Leif Eriksson, 630
Ku Klux Klan Acts of 1870-1871, Levin, Lewis, 30-32
478 Levy, Asser, 452
Lewisohn, Ludwig, 229
La Guardia, Fiorello, 414 Liberia, 7
Ladino, 637 Liliuokalani, 307
Landon v. Plasencia, 563 Lillo, Don De, 233
Languages, 240, 242, 344, 545; and Lincoln, Abraham, 445
African immigrants, 171; and Lindbergh law of 1934, 479
Chicano movement, 129; and Literacy tests, 97, 100, 204-205, 226,
Chinese immigrants, 131, 158, 163; 339-345, 349, 401, 534-535, 561, 697
and Gypsies, 296; of India, 73; and Literature, 507-512; of Asian
Italian immigrants, 514-515; Americans, 57-60; of European
Japanese, 425; and Jewish immigrants, 224-234
immigrants, 637; and Koreans, Lithuanian immigrants, 271, 595, 623,
467-468, 475; and Latinos, 484, 491, 711; in literature, 230. See also Baltic
506; and Mexican immigrants, 484; immigrants
and Native Americans, 203, 530; and Little Havana, 512-514
773
Subject Index
Little Italies, 514-516; and generational Machine politics, 205, 333, 518-521;
acculturation, 273 and Irish immigrants, 238, 399, 401;
Little Jerusalem, 445 Miami, 183
Little Saigon, 54, 220 McKay, Claude, 417, 508, 691
Little Tokyos, 516-518; and McKinley, William, 344
Chinatowns, 517; and generational McMichael, Morton, 31
acculturation, 273 McVeigh, Timothy, 556
Lodge, Henry Cabot, 340, 342, 344, Mafia, 413
350 Magnuson Act. See Immigration Act of
London Company, 388, 419 1943
Long, Huey, 519 Mail-order brides, 521-524; stereotypes,
Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth, 508-509 523-524
Loring, H. Sheldon, 581-582 Maine; and Ku Klux Klan, 479; Roman
Los Angeles; Arab immigrants, 34, 455, Catholic immigrants, 419; Seeds of
610; Asian Americans, 64; Peace camp, 457
Chinatown, 130, 132, 160; Chinese Malamud, Bernard, 230
immigrants, 136, 141; Citizens Malawi, 311
Committee on Coordination of Malaysia, 612
Unemployment Relief, 536; Filipino Manasurangkun brothers, 657-659
immigrants, 264; Gypsy immigrants, Mandel, Ernest, 563
296; Iranian immigrants, 392; Israeli Mandela, Nelson, 183
immigrants, 405; Korean Mangione, Jerre, 233
immigrants, 470, 474-475; Little Manzanar Relocation Center, 429
Tokyo, 434, 516-517; Mexican Mao Zedong; and Taiwan, 656
immigrants, 536; riots, 62, 471; Marcello v. Bonds, 564
Russian immigrants, 622; South Marciano, Rocky, 413
Asian immigrants, 72 Marcos, Ferdinand, 620
Lotus Blossom, 57 Mariana Islands, 305
Louisiana; alien land laws, 21; Mariel boatlift, 172, 179, 181, 524-528,
bilingualism in, 91; French 620
Canadians, 508; Gypsy immigrants, Maronite Catholic Church. See
295; and Ku Klux Klan, 480; Orthodox Christians
machine politics, 519; slavery in, 5; Marshall, James Wilson, 115
Vietnamese immigrants, 672. See also Martin Luther King, Jr., Elementary School
New Orleans Children v. Michigan Board of
Louisiana Territory, 316 Education, 501
Luce-Celler Bill of 1946, 648 Martinique, 9, 636
Lucena, Abraham de, 452 Maryland; Jewish immigrants, 636; and
LULAC. See League of United Latin Know-Nothing Party, 465; Korean
American Citizens immigrants, 467; Swedish
Lutheran Church, 285, 631-632, 634 immigrants, 631. See also Baltimore
Lynching, 175, 416, 446, 478 Mason, Richard Barnes, 115
Lyon, Matthew, 17 Massachusetts; Chinese immigrants,
155; Dominican immigrants, 208;
McCarran, Patrick, 359, 615 Roman Catholic Church, 320, 559;
McCarran-Walter Act. See Immigration Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 626-629;
and Nationality Act of 1952 Scandinavian immigrants, 632;
McCarthy, Mary, 232 Swedish immigrants, 631. See also
McCreary Act of 1893, 145 Boston
774
Subject Index
Mauritius, 67, 522 Puerto Rican immigrants, 182; West

Maximilian, Alexander Philipp, 286 Indian immigrants, 689
Mayan, 484 Michigan; Arab immigrants, 33, 44;
Meagher, Timothy, 169-170 Asian Indian immigrants, 69;
Megapolensis, Dominie Johannes, Mexican immigrants, 101. See also
451-452 Detroit
Meissner, Doris, 267-268 Michlin, Arnold, 456
Melting pot theory, 90, 224, 226-228, Middle East Friendship League, 457
274, 319, 529-531, 544; and Middle Eastern immigrants, 538-541;
assimilation, 79-82; and Chinese and U.S. Census, 124. See also Arab
immigrants, 134; critiques of, 189, immigrants; Iranian immigrants;
462, 548; and cultural pluralism, Israeli immigrants; Jewish
188-189; and immigrant motivation, immigrants
338; and literature, 226-227 Migrant superordination, 542
Mennonites, 284, 286, 545 Migration, 542-549
Mestizos, 127, 129, 483 Migration and Refugee Assistance Act
Methodist Church, 285, 632 of 1962, 697
Meusenbach, John, 286 Miller, Samuel F., 309
Mexican American Legal Defense and Minnesota; alien land laws, 21; Hmong
Education Fund, 531-533 immigrants, 324
Mexican Americans. See Mexican Miscegenation laws, 433
immigrants Mississippi; civil rights worker murders,
Mexican deportations, 127, 533-537 479
Mexican Farm Labor Program. See Missouri; alien land laws, 21; and
Bracero program California gold rush, 116; German
Mexican immigrants, 484; and Chicano immigrants, 287; machine politics,
movement, 125-130; deportation of, 399, 519; and Operation Wetback,
572-576; families, 494; holidays, 498; 574
illegal, 334-338; and Ku Klux Klan, Mistretta v. United States, 372
480; laborers, 489-490; and Mexican Mitchell, George, 47
Revolution, 483; and Sikhs, 648; Model minorities, 549-554; Chinese,
stereotypes, 127, 575; 158; stereotypes, 52, 159
unemployment among, 491; and Mongrelization, 554-555
U.S. Census, 123 Montagnards, 671
Mexican War, 101, 125-126, 484, Montana, 21, 131, 324
544 Moore, Robert, 258
“Mexicano,” 127, 251 Moravians, 271
Mexico; borders, 97, 367, 460, 547; and Mormons, 221, 632
bracero program, 103-107; Morrison v. Olson, 372
indigenous cultures, 483; and Mosby, John S., 581-582
Mexican Americans, 125; and Mothers’ Aid Law of 1913, 646
Operation Wetback, 572-576 Motley, Constance Baker, 691
Mezei, Ignatz, 563 Multiculturalism Act of 1988 (Canada),
MFLP (Mexican Farm Labor Program). 194
See Bracero program Muslims, 555-558; stereotypes, 556; and
Miami; crime, 526; Cuban immigrants, terrorist attacks, 641
482, 486, 512-514; Jamaican Mussolini, Benito, 510, 705
immigrants, 417; Little Havana, Mutual Security Act of 1951, 615
512-514; machine politics, 183; Myanmar, 324
775
Subject Index
NAAA. See National Association of Arab and Italian immigrants, 412-413;

Americans and Ku Klux Klan, 322; and Palmer
NAACP. See National Association for raids, 587-588; and Philadelphia
the Advancement of Colored People riots, 29-33; and Roman Catholic
Nabokov, Vladimir, 230 Church, 559, 586; and Sacco and
Nader, Ralph, 371 Vanzetti trial, 626-629; and
NAFTA. See North American Free undocumented workers, 321; and
Trade Agreement World War I, 91
Nahuatl, 484 Naturalization, 167, 562-569; and Cable
NAM. See National Association of Act, 114; and Chinese refugees, 355;
Manufacturers and green cards, 293-294; and
Nanak Dev, Guru, 647 immigration law, 377-378; and
Nation of Immigrants, A (Kennedy), xiii Japanese immigrants, 278. See also
National Association for the Citizenship; Immigration and
Advancement of Colored People, Nationality Acts
206, 646, 669 Naturalization Act of 1790, 569-570
National Association of Arab Naturalization Act of 1798, 16, 257-258;
Americans, 44 repeal of, 18
National Association of Manufacturers, Naturalization Act of 1802, 166
587 Naval Clearing Act of 1962, 305
National Farm Labor Union, 252 Neale, Leonard, 258
National Farm Workers Association, Nebraska, 223, 230, 508; alien land
251-257 laws, 21
National Genetic Diseases Act of 1976, Neier, Aryeh, 311
706 Net migration rate, 543
National Lawyers’ Guild, 382 Nevada; Chinatowns, 131
National Origins Act. See Immigration New Jersey; Asian Indian immigrants,
Act of 1924 69; Dominican immigrants, 208;
National Women’s Trade Union Iranian immigrants, 394; Jamaican
League, 272, 646, 662 immigrants, 417; Korean
Nationalist Chinese. See Taiwanese immigrants, 467; Latinos, 610;
immigrants Orthodox Christian immigrants, 48;
Nationality Act of 1870, 160 Swedish immigrants, 631; West
Native American (newspaper), 31 Indian immigrants, 689, 691
Native Americans; and citizenship, 121, New Mexico; alien land laws, 21;
166; discrimination against, 202; Latinos, 128, 505, 591, 610; in
and German immigrants, 286; and literature, 508; and Mexican War,
Hawaiians, 124; literature of, 507; 484; Spanish settlements, 316
and “melting pot,” 529-530; and New Orleans, 13, 169; Cuban
Pacific islanders, 308; precolonial immigrants, 176; German
population, 609; and Scandinavians, immigrants, 282; Irish immigrants,
634; and slavery, 317; and U.S. 397; in literature, 508; slavery in, 5
Census, 123; and U.S. Indian policy, New York City, 50; Arab immigrants,
202-203 34, 455, 610; Asian Americans, 64;
Native Sons and Daughters of the Asian immigrants, 71; Chinatown,
Golden West, 710 131-132; garment industry, 270-271;
Native Sons of the Golden State, 136 Gypsy immigrants, 296; Haitian
Nativism, 320, 558-562, 702-707; and immigrants, 302; Iranian
Asian immigrants, 578; defined, 81; immigrants, 392; Irish immigrants,
776
Subject Index
398; Israeli immigrants, 405; Italian North American Free Trade

immigrants, 410-411, 514; Jamaican Agreement, 461, 733
immigrants, 417; Jewish immigrants, North Carolina, 444; Hmong
50; Jewish settlement of, 449-453; immigrants, 324; and Ku Klux Klan,
Korean immigrants, 470, 474; Little 480
Tokyo, 516, 518; machine politics, North Dakota, 632
519; Maronite immigrants, 48; Northwest Arctic School District v. Califano,
Puerto Rican immigrants, 14; 502
Russian immigrants, 271; slavery in, “Nuyoricans,” 14
5; South Asian immigrants, 72; NWTUL. See National Women’s Trade
tenements, 229; terrorist attack on, Union League
637-643; Triangle Shirtwaist
Company fire, 271, 661-663, 697; OAP. See Overseas Admission Program
West Indian immigrants, 689 O’Connor, Edwin, 232
New York Indians v. United States, 202 O’Connor, Flannery, 232
New York State; Asian Americans, 64; O’Connor, Sandra Day, 591
Asian Indian immigrants, 69; OCR. See Office for Civil Rights
Chinese immigrants, 155; Office for Civil Rights, 500-502
Dominican immigrants, 208; Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 307
Haitian immigrants, 300; Iranian OHA. See Office of Hawaiian Affairs
immigrants, 394; Japanese O’Hara, Frank, 233
immigrants, 425; Korean O’Hara, John, 232
immigrants, 467; Latinos, 610; Ohio; Asian Indian immigrants, 69;
Taiwanese immigrants, 655 German immigrants, 287; Kent State
New Zealanders, 347, 352, 683 University, 457; Mexican
Newport, Christopher, 420 immigrants, 101
Newspapers; anti-Asian, 136; anti-Irish, Oklahoma, 508; federal building
403; anti-Jewish, 446; Arab bombing, 45, 393, 556; Filipino
American, 42, 455; Chinese immigrants, 2
American, 158; foreign-language, Old Owl, 286
27; German American, 286; Italian Olsen, Tillie, 230
American, 515; Japanese American, O’Neill, Danny, 232
425; Jewish, 455; and mail-order O’Neill, Eugene, 231-232
brides, 521; Mexican American, 536; Onoto Watanna (Winifred Eaton), 57
nativist, 31, 584 Opechancanough, 421
NFLU. See National Farm Labor Operation Wetback, 106, 572-576
Union Opium Wars, 146
NFWA. See National Farm Workers Orantes-Hernandez v. Meese, 313
Association Oregon; alien land laws, 21;
Nguyen, Tuan Anh, 571-572 Chinatowns, 131; Chinese
Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization immigrants, 136; English-only
Service, 571-572 movement, 585; Gypsy immigrants,
Nicaragua, 116, 486 296; Japanese immigrants, 425, 516
Nicaraguan immigrants, 200 Organization of American States, 298
Nigerian immigrants, 8 Oriental Exclusion Act of 1924, 682,
Nine-Eleven. See September 11 terrorist 684, 687
attacks Ortega, Daniel, 486
Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 563 Orthodox Christians, 42, 44, 48,
Noor, Queen, 47 622-624
777
Subject Index
Ottoman Empire, 42 Plyler v. Doe, 565, 590-593

Overseas Admission Program, 312 Plymouth Company, 419
Ozawa, Takao, 568, 576-579 Pocahontas, 421-422
Ozawa v. United States, 568, 576-579 Poe, Edgar Allan, 231
Ozick, Cynthia, 230 Poitier, Sidney, 691
Polish immigrants, 242, 507, 594-597;
Pacific islanders, 304-308; as Native stereotypes, 597
Americans, 308. See also Hawaiians Political machines. See Machine
Page, Horace F., 580 politics
Page law of 1875, 579-583 Polk, James K., 115
Pahlavi, Muhammad Reza, 392, 620 Poor Law Extension Act of 1847 (Great
Paine, Thomas, 507 Britain), 396
Pakistan, 70, 311 Portugal; explorations of, 483; Gypsies,
Pakistani immigrants, 71-76 295; Jews, 636-637; and slave trade,
Palmer, A. Mitchell, 584-589 483
Palmer raids, 584-589 Portuguese immigrants, 306; in
Panama, 668 Canada, 194
Park, Robert Ezra, 221 Pound, Ezra, 510
Passenger Cases, 309 Powell, Lewis F., Jr., 372
Patriot Act of 2001, 641, 734; and Powers, J. F., 233
illegal aliens, 335 Powhatan, 421
Pearl Buck Foundation, 22 Powhatan Confederacy, 420
Peerson, Cleng, 631 Proposition 187 (California), 268, 461,
Peltason, Jack W., 600 598-600, 602
Pendergast, Tom, 519 Proposition 227 (California), 28, 85,
Penelas, Alex, 292 502, 532, 600-604
Pennsylvania; Asian Indian immigrants, Prostitutes, 320, 343, 545, 645; Asian,
69; Chinatowns, 132; garment 64; Chinese, 175, 580; Filipino, 23;
industry, 270; German immigrants, German, 684; and Page law,
216, 284, 286; refugee detention 579-583
camps, 526; Swedish immigrants, Puerto Ricans, 14, 179; “circular
631; Vietnamese immigrants, 672; migration,” 491; and citizenship,
welfare system, 566. See also 196, 489; and Dominicans, 210;
Philadelphia families, 496; family life, 494;
Peruvian immigrants, 437-438, 487 holidays, 498; occupations of,
Phelan, James, 709 490-491; unemployment among,
Philadelphia; anti-Irish riots, 29-33, 491; and U.S. Census, 123
559; Chinatown, 131; Federal riot of Puerto Rico, 485; and Dominican
1799, 257-258; garment industry, immigrants, 486
270; Italian immigrants, 410, 514; Puritans, 107, 507, 604
Jewish immigrants, 444; poor house, Push and pull factors, 604-606, 664
390; South Asian immigrants, 72 Puzo, Mario, 226, 233, 413
Philippines, 123, 620; Amerasian
children, 23-24; war brides, 681. See Queen Mary, SS, 686, 688
also Filipino immigrants Quota Law of 1921. See Immigration
Picture brides, 64, 434, 589-590, 696 Act of 1921
Pilgrims, English, 108 Quotas, 8, 99, 123, 191, 244, 379,
Pinochet, Augusto, 620 460-461, 463, 561, 677, 679; and
Plessy v. Ferguson, 205, 322, 439, 499 Asian immigrants, 62, 68, 684; and
778
Subject Index
Chinese immigrants, 112, 354; and Rhode Island; Hmong immigrants, 324;
family members, 380, 677; and Jewish immigrants, 444, 636; and
Haitian immigrants, 299; and slave trade, 6
Immigration Act of 1921, 343-348; Ridge, Tom, 639
and Immigration Act of 1924 Riis, Jacob, 229
(National Origins Act), 322, Rio Grande, 97, 116, 504, 573-574, 665
349-352, 534, 547; and Immigration Rolfe, John, 422
Act of 1990, 463; and Immigration Rölvaag, O. E., 508
and Nationality Act of 1952, 359; Roman Catholic Church; and Anti-Irish
and Immigration and Nationality Riots of 1844, 29-33, 559; and the
Act of 1965, 355, 362-365, 547; and Bible, 30; and education, 238; and
Immigration Reform and Control Filipino immigrants, 266; and
Act of 1986, 386; and Jewish German immigrants, 285; in Guam,
immigrants, 51; and Latin American 305; hierarchical structure, 235; and
immigrants, 99-100; and Mexican Irish immigrants, 29-33, 238,
immigrants, 97; and refugees, 380, 396-399, 402, 404, 559; and Jews,
614-615; and Taiwanese immigrants, 636; and Know-Nothing Party, 465;
655; and war brides, 682-683 and Ku Klux Klan, 479; and Latinos,
497; and nativism, 559, 586; and
Rabin, Yitzhak, 407 Polish immigrants, 594-595;
Race mixing, 554-555, 560 prejudice against, 350; and Santería,
Racial and ethnic demographic trends, 630; and Scandinavian immigrants,
606-612 632; and Scotch-Irish, 120; and
Rahall, Nick Joe, 44 Spanish immigrants, 177; Ursuline
Raleigh, Walter, 419 order, 320; and Vietnamese
Randall, Margaret, 196 immigrants, 651, 671, 673
Reagan, Ronald, 302, 384, 430, 552, Romnichals (Gypsies), 296
620; and bilingual education, 85, Roosevelt, Eleanor, 615
94; and civil rights, 502; and Cuba, Roosevelt, Franklin D., 398, 520; and
527 Japanese internment, 424, 426, 428,
Red Cross, 278, 687 434, 710
Red Scare, 478, 561, 584-589 Roosevelt, Theodore, 277-278, 645; and
“Redemptioners,” 388 Japanese immigration, 279, 433,
Refugee Act of 1980, 179, 191, 311-313, 439, 441, 710; on language, 216
463, 620, 697 Root, Elihu, 278-280, 438
Refugee fatigue, 612-614 Rosier, James, 419
Refugee Relief Act of 1953, 355, 361, Roth, Henry, 229
548, 614-617 Roth, Philip, 226
Refugees, 310-315; African, 9; Rusk, Dean, 364
deportation of, 548; Haitians, Russia; and Japan, 709
297-300; and racial/ethnic relations, Russian immigrants, 242, 622-625;
618-621; Tibetans, 659-661; and U.S. garment workers, 271; mail-order
policy, 184-187, 524-528 brides, 522
Rehnquist, William H., 372, 591
Reich, Robert B., 658 Sabath, Adolph, 346
Religion. See individual religions Sacco, Nicola, 413, 626-629
Reno, Janet, 267-268; and Cuban Sacco and Vanzetti trial, 413, 626-629
refugees, 185, 290-293 St. John, J. Hector, 507, 529
Reynolds, James, 258 St. Patrick’s Cathedral, 30
779
Subject Index
Saionji, Kinmochi, 438 Serra, Junípero, 316

Samoans, 123, 305-306 Settlement house movement, 643-647;
San Francisco; Asian Americans, 64, Hull-House, 332-334
438-443; Chinatown, 130-131, 141, Seward, William Henry, 111, 283
147, 151-156, 158, 161-163, 580; Shahn, Bernarda Bryson, 4
earthquake, 158, 278, 438-439, 710; Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei,
Gypsy immigrants, 296; Japanese 563
immigrants, 438-443; Little Tokyo, Shehhi, Marwan al-, 641
516; South Asian immigrants, 72; Shenouda III, Pope, 48
“yellow peril” campaign, 707-711 Shepard, Charles R., 137
“Sanctuary laws,” 336 Sikh immigrants, 68, 71, 647-649, 664
Sandburg, Carl, 229 Simmons, William J., 478
Santana, 286 Sinclair, Upton, 230, 507-508
Santería, 629-630 Singer, Isaac Bashevis, 230
Saroyan, William, 229-230 Sirhan, Sirhan Bishara, 47
Scandinavian immigrants, 235, 630-634; Sixth Amendment, 294
and education, 238; and Native Slaughterhouse cases, 205
Americans, 634 Slave trade, 4, 168-171, 609; abolition
Scheuer, James H., 92 of, 108
Schmitz, Eugene E., 440, 709 Slavery, 108, 205, 317, 322; and African
Schneider v. Rusk, 568 immigration, 3-11; in Caribbean, 11;
Schneiderman, Rose, 272 and citizenship, 166; and
Schneiderman v. United States, 568 Constitution, U.S., 201; and “coolie”
Schwarzenegger, Arnold, 216, xiii labor, 175; and German immigrants,
Scotch-Irish immigrants, 635-636 286; and indentured servitude,
Scott, Dred, 592, 699 388-389, 695; and Irish immigrants,
Scott Act of 1888, 143, 145, 157 237, 400; in Jamaica, 416; and
Scott v. Sandford, 592 Know-Nothing Party, 465; and
Secret Service, U.S.; and Homeland Native Americans, 317; and
Security Department, 330 Santería, 629; and U.S. Census,
Sedition Act of 1798, 257-258 122
Seeds of Peace, 457 Slavic immigrants, 244, 344, 351, 595;
Segregation, 322, 668; in California, and “mongrelization,” 555; Poles,
438-443; and Chinese immigrants, 594-597
161; and Japanese Americans, 278, Slocum, Tokutaro “Tokie” Nishimura,
427, 438-443, 708; and languages, 426
216; and Mexican Americans, 126, Smathers, George A., 178
504; of schools, 206, 499 Smith, Alfred E., 398-399, 663
Select Commission on Immigration Smith, Betty, 232
and Refugee Policy, 384 Smith, H. T., 183
Sephardic Jews, 34, 405, 408, 444, 452, Smith, John, 420-422, 507
454-455, 636-637 Smith, Joseph, 221
Sephardim. See Sephardic Jews Smith, Wayne, 525-526
September 11 terrorist attacks, 39, 173, Smuggling; of African slaves, 6,
327, 637-643; and hate crimes, 45; 168-171; and Border Patrol, 100-101;
and Homeland Security of Chinese immigrants, 138-140;
Department, 327-332; and illegal drugs, 294; and Immigration and
aliens, 335; and Immigration and Naturalization Service, 367; of
Naturalization Service, 369 laborers, 461, 659
780
Subject Index
Smythe, Thomas, 422 Superordination, 391-392, 542

Social Gospel movement, 644 Surial, H. G., 48
Soldier Brides Act of 1947, 687 Sutter, John Augustus, 115
Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr, 230 Sweatt v. Painter, 206
Somers, George, 422
Sousa, Mathias de, 636 Taft, William Howard, 19, 341, 344-345
South Carolina, 18; Jewish settlers, Taiwan, 163, 355; and China, 22, 656
50 Taiwanese immigrants, 146, 655-657;
South Dakota, 149, 285, 508 and education, 52, 655
Southeast Asian immigrants, 649-653; Talese, Gay, 233
Hmongs, 324-327 Tammany Hall, 519
Soviet Jewish immigrants, 653-655 Tan, Amy, 59, 509
Sowell, Thomas, 552 Taney, Roger B., 592
Spain; explorations of, 483; Gypsies, Tangrenbu (Chinatown), 131
295; Jews, 636-637; and slave trade, Taylor, Edward, 507
483 Television; and emergency planning,
Spanish-American War, 178, 485 330
Sri Lanka, 194 Tennessee; and Ku Klux Klan, 477, 480;
Stalin, Joseph, 604 machine politics, 519; and
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, 286 Operation Wetback, 574
Starr, Ellen Gates, 332-334 Terrorism; and Homeland Security
State Criminal Alien Assistance Department, 327-332; September
Program, 336 11, 39, 173, 327, 335, 637-643
Statue of Liberty, 225, 320, 363; Texas; alien land laws, 21;
Lazarus’s poem, 225 Anglo-American settlement, 504;
Steamships, 116, 240, 282 Asian Americans, 64; Asian Indian
Steele, Shelby, 552 immigrants, 69; and Border Patrol,
Steinbeck, John, 508-509 97; German immigrants, 287; Gypsy
Stereotypes; African American, 691; immigrants, 296; illegal aliens, 335;
Arab, 35, 38-42, 454; Asian Korean immigrants, 467; and Ku
American, 52, 59, 60-63, 553; Klux Klan, 479; Latinos, 505,
Chinese, 57, 137, 159, 174-176, 404; 590-593, 610; Mexican immigrants,
Cuban, 527; German, 545; Gypsy, 92, 101; and Mexican War, 484;
296; Irish, 282, 399, 403-405, 545; Operation Wetback, 572-576;
Israeli, 407; Italian, 226, 409, 414; segregation in, 206, 504; Vietnamese
Japanese, 57, 61; Jewish, 446; immigrants, 672
Latino, 497; in literature, 226; Texas, University of, 206
mail-order brides, 523-524; Mexican, Thai Americans; and education, 52
127, 575; “model minorities,” 324, Thai immigrants, 649-650, 657-659,
549, 553; Muslim, 556; Polish, 597; 697
West Indian, 691 Thailand, 23; Amerasians, 24; Hmongs,
Stevens, John Paul, 297 324; war brides, 681, 685
Strong, Josiah, 242 Thirteenth Amendment, 166, 201, 205,
Stuyvesant, Peter, 443, 450-452, 636 699
Suar, Xavier, 183 Thomas, Clarence, 207, 297
Sugarman v. Dowell, 565 Thomas, Franklin, 691
Sugi, Suma, 425 Thoreau, Henry David, 231
Sui Sin Far (Edith Maud Eaton), 57 Tibetan immigrants, 659-661
Sun Yat-sen, 141 Tien, Chang-lin, 600
781
Subject Index
Tijerina, Reies López, 128 United Farm Workers Union, 77

Tingley, George B., 154 United Nations High Commission for
Transportation, Department of, 173 Refugees, 311-312, 616, 697
Transportation Security United States Code, 172, 381
Administration, 329 United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy,
Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire, 271, 563
661-663, 697 United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 567
Trinidad and Tobago, 9, 13, 67, 363, United States v. Jung Ah Lung, 144-146
630 United States v. Winans, 202
Trop v. Dulles, 568 United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 699-702
Truax v. Raich, 564 Universal Declaration of Human
Truman, Harry S., 359-361, 615, 687; Rights, 311
and European refugees, 322, 614 Universal Negro Improvement
Tuchman, Gloria Matta, 602 Association, 667-670
Twain, Mark, 510 Unz, Ron, 532, 601
Tweed, “Boss” William Marcy, 519 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Twice migrants, 664 Services, 366
Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934, 728 U.S. English, 216
Tz’u-hsi (Cixi), 111 USA Patriot Act. See Patriot Act of 2001
USCIS. See Citizenship and
UFW. See United Farm Workers of Immigration Services, U.S.
America Utah, 21, 131
UFWOC. See United Farm Workers
Organizing Committee Valachi, Joseph, 413
Ukrainian immigrants, 624 Vang Pao, 324
Undocumented immigrants; and Vanzetti, Bartolomeo, 413, 626-629
Border Patrol, 96 Verrazano, Giovanni da, 410
Undocumented workers, 191, 319, 547, Vespucci, Amerigo, 409
665-666; in Florida, 267-269; Vietnam; and Amerasian children,
Haitians, 302; and immigration law, 23-24; communism in, 23; Hmongs,
383-387; and nativists, 321. See also 324; war brides, 681, 685
Illegal immigration Vietnam War; and Amerasian children,
UNHCR. See United Nations High 23; and Chicano movement, 129;
Commission for Refugees Hmongs, 324, 650; and Laos, 324; in
UNIA. See Universal Negro literature, 59, 233; and
Improvement Association Montagnards, 671; protest
Unionism, 29-30, 236, 344, 346, movements, 430; and war brides,
586-587; and Asian immigrants, 19, 681-682, 685
61, 76-78, 135, 157, 277, 349, 709; Vietnamese immigrants, 62, 64, 620,
and bracero program, 573; and 649-650, 670-676; demographics,
farmworkers, 99, 101, 251; and 192; and education, 675; and U.S.
garment workers, 271, 697; and Census, 123
Polish immigrants, 594; and West Vikings, 630
Indians, 13, 417, 667; and women, Virginia; Jewish immigrants, 636;
646, 661-663, 695, 697 Korean immigrants, 467; Native
United Farm Workers of America, American peoples, 316; settlement
251-257 of, 4, 316-317, 410, 419-423, 609;
United Farm Workers Organizing slavery in, 4; Vietnamese
Committee, 251 immigrants, 672
782
Subject Index
Virginia and Kentucky Resolves, 17-18 WILPF. See Women’s International

Virginia Charter of 1606, 165 League for Peace and Freedom
Visas, 208, 352, 357, 374, 676-681; Wilson, Pete, 598, 601
categories, 378-379; fees, 99-101; Wilson, Woodrow, 20, 341, 345-346,
and lottery, 547; and quotas, 191, 350, 727
377; reentry, 143; and refugees, 615; Wingfield, Edward Maria, 420
violations of, 193, 294; and war Wisconsin; German immigrants, 287;
brides, 683, 686 Hmong immigrants, 324; refugee
Visel, Charles P., 536 detention camps, 526
Voluntary Agencies Responsible for Wobblies. See Industrial Workers of the
Refugees, 620 World
Voting Rights Act of 1965, 401 Women immigrants, 694-699; Arabs, 36,
Voting Rights Act of 1975, 501 44, 46; Asian, 59, 63-67, 579-583;
and Cable Act, 113-115; and
Walcott, Derek, 691 California gold rush, 117; Chinese,
Wales, J. A., 135 355; Filipino, 260, 262; and garment
Wallach, John, 457 industry, 213, 270-272, 657-659,
Walter, Francis, 359 661-663, 697; Hmong, 326; and
War brides, 681-688 indentured servitude, 387-390; Irish,
War Brides Act of 1945, 355, 435, 614, 282, 398; Israeli, 408; Japanese, 435,
683, 685-688, 697 441; Korean, 475; mail-order brides,
War Measures Act of 1942 (Canada), 521-524; Middle Eastern, 538;
435 Muslim, 556; and Page law, 579-583;
War Relocation Authority, 426 picture brides, 589-590; Polish, 595;
Washington, Booker T., 668 and settlement houses, 643-647;
Washington, D.C.; Chinatown, 131; and Southeast Asian, 650; Vietnamese,
Ku Klux Klan, 479; Maronite 671; war brides, 681-688
immigrants, 48; police brutality in, Women’s International League for
183; terrorist attack on, 327, 637-643 Peace and Freedom, 646
Washington, George, 505, 570 Wong, Kent, 77
Washington State; alien land laws, 21; Wong Kim Ark, 699-702
Chinatowns, 131; Chinese Wong Kim Ark case, 699-702
immigrants, 136; Gypsy immigrants, Wong Quan v. United States, 144-146
296; Hmong immigrants, 324; World Trade Center, 639
Japanese immigrants, 425; Korean World War I; and Arab immigrants, 42;
immigrants, 467; Vietnamese Jewish refugees, 26; and Ku Klux
immigrants, 672 Klan, 51; and nativism, 91; and war
West, Thomas, 422 brides, 682
West Indian immigrants, 551, 553, World War II; and agricultural labor,
689-693; and education, 689; 103-107; and bracero program,
Jamaicans, 415-419; stereotypes, 691 103-107; and Japan, 437; Japanese
“Wetbacks,” 572-576, 665-666 American internment, 62, 321, 424,
Wheatley, Phillis, 7, 507 426-432, 434, 437-438, 710; and
Whig Party, 29, 237, 283 Japanese immigrants, 62; and
White, Byron R., 372 Japanese Peruvians, 437-438; in
White, John, 507 literature, 57; and Little Tokyos,
White ethnics, 693-694 517; and Mexican Americans, 129;
Whom Shall We Welcome?, 361 occupation of Japan, 22; and war
Williams, Walter E., 552 brides, 681-688
783
Subject Index
WRA. See War Relocation Authority “Yellow peril,” 61, 432, 438-443, 576;
Wright, Luke E., 278-280 campaign, 707-711
Wright, Richard, 510 Yerby, Frank, 510
Wyoming, 61, 131, 136 Yezierska, Anzia, 229
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 162, 564
Xenophobia, 226, 320, 702-707; Yiddish, 50, 285, 444, 637
and culutral pluralism, 188; Yon Yonson (play), 633
and English-only movement, 218; Yoshikawa, Iwao, 577
and Federalists, 16; and nativists, Young, Brigham, 221
81; and Sacco and Vanzetti trial, Young Women’s Christian Association,
413 695
Yamauchi, Wakako, 59 Zadvydas, Kestutis, 711-712

Yarborough, Ralph Webster, 92-93 Zadvydas v. Davis, 711-712
Yasui v. United States, 430 Zangwill, Israel, 226, 530
784

Carl L. Bankston (Editor), Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo (Editor) - Immigration in U.S. History (2 Volume Set) - Salem Press (2006)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carl L. Bankston (Editor), Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo (Editor) - Immigration in U.S. History (2 Volume Set) - Salem Press (2006)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Immigration

Salem Press, Inc.

Frontispiece: Italian immigrants approaching Ellis Island on a ferry in 1905.

Copyright © 2006, by Salem Press, Inc.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

printed in the united states of america

Cable Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Chinese American Citizens Alliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Demographics of immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

Eastern European Jewish immigrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212

Family businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

Garment industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270

Haitian boat people. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

Illegal aliens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334

Accent discrimination, 1 Celtic Irish, 119

European immigrant literature, Head money cases, 309

Indigenous superordination, 391 Jamaican immigrants, 415

Jewish immigrants, 443 Operation Wetback, 572

War brides, 681 Appendices

Subject Matter The two volumes of Immigration in U.S. History examine

Immigration in U.S. History answers such questions as

Using This Set Each of the alphabetically arranged articles in Immigration

McCrea Adams Steve D. Boilard

Carl Allsup Aubrey W. Bonnett

Barbara Bair Anthony D. Branch

Carl L. Bankston III Michael Broadway

Rosann Bar Mary Louise Buley-Meissner

Graciela Bardallo-Vivero Michael H. Burchett

Alvin K. Benson William H. Burnside

Milton Berman Edmund J. Campion

Tej K. Bhatia Brenda E. Reinertsen Caranicas

Warren M. Billings José A. Carmona

Jack Carter Christopher H. Efird

Balance Chow Sharon Elise

Stephen Cresswell R. M. Frumkin

Norma Crews C. George Fry

Edward R. Crowther Gloria Fulton

Rochelle L. Dalla John C. Gardner

Judith Boyce DeMark Robert F. Gorman

Ashley W. Doane, Jr. Lewis L. Gould

Joyce Duncan Christopher Guillebeau

Michael Haas Robert Jacobs

Peter J. Haas Duncan R. Jamieson

Marian Wynne Haber Kristine Kleptach Jamieson

Irwin Halfond Kathleen Odell Korgen

Susan E. Hamilton Melvin Kulbicki

Sheldon Hanft M. Bahati Kuumba

Keith Harper P. R. Lannert

Peter B. Heller Douglas Edward LaPrade

Arthur W. Helweg Gregory A. Levitt

Diane Andrews Henningfeld Thomas Tandy Lewis

Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo Paul Madden

Keith Orlando Hilton Paul D. Mageli

Ronald W. Howard Martin J. Manning

John Quinn Imholte Cecilia G. Manrique

W. Turrentine Jackson Carl Henry Marcoux

Chogollah Maroufi R. Kent Rasmussen

David Peck Larry Schweikart

Wayne J. Pitts Donald C. Simmons, Jr.

Marjorie J. Podolsky Celia Stall-Meadows

James Stanlaw Thomas J. Edward Walker

Francis C. Staskon Annita Marie Ward

Susan A. Stussy Major L. Wilson