Download Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality by Victor C. Romero PDF

By Victor C. Romero

Throughout American background, the govt has used U.S. citizenship and immigration legislation to guard privileged teams from much less privileged ones, utilizing citizenship as a “legitimate” proxy for another way invidious, and sometimes unconstitutional, discrimination at the foundation of race. whereas racial discrimination isn't legally applicable at the present time, profiling at the foundation of citizenship continues to be mostly unchecked, and has in reality arguably elevated within the wake of the September eleven terror assaults at the usa. during this considerate exam of the intersection among American immigration and constitutional legislation, Victor C. Romero attracts our awareness to a “constitutional immigration legislations paradox” that reserves convinced rights for U.S. voters basically, whereas at the same time purporting to regard everybody rather less than constitutional legislations despite citizenship.

As a naturalized Filipino American, Romero brings an outsider's standpoint to Alienated, forcing us to examine constitutional immigration legislation from the vantage element of individuals whose citizenship prestige is murky (either legally or from the perspective of alternative voters and lawmakers), together with foreign-born adoptees, undocumented immigrants, travelers, overseas scholars, and same-gender bi-national companions. Romero endorses an equality-based analyzing of the structure and advocates a brand new theoretical and functional strategy that protects the person rights of non-citizens with out sacrificing their personhood.

Show description

Read or Download Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America PDF

Best civil rights books

Profiles, Probabilities, and Stereotypes

This publication employs a cautious, rigorous, but full of life method of the well timed query of no matter if we will justly generalize approximately contributors of a bunch at the foundation of statistical developments of that staff. for example, may still an army academy exclude ladies simply because, on standard, girls are extra delicate to hazing than males?

The Women of CourtWatch: Reforming a Corrupt Family Court System

'The girls of CourtWatch did what they have been advised could not be performed. They drove a gaggle of robust and entrenched kinfolk courtroom judges off the bench - an individual referred to as them 'the babes who slew the Goliath. ' It used to be relatively a victory' - Carole Bell Ford, from the advent. Houston used to be a bad position to divorce or search baby custody within the Eighties and early Nineteen Nineties.

Feminist and queer legal theory : intimate encounters, uncomfortable conversations

Feminist and Queer felony idea: Intimate Encounters, Uncomfortable Conversations is a groundbreaking assortment that brings jointly top students in modern felony conception. the amount explores, now and then contentiously, convergences and departures between various feminist and queer political tasks.

God, Schools, and Government Funding: First Amendment Conundrums

Lately, a conservative majority of the U. S. preferrred court docket, over energetic dissents, has constructed circumventions to the institution Clause of the 1st modification that let nation legislatures unabashedly to take advantage of public tax money to help deepest straight forward and secondary schooling, with nearly all of that investment attaining parochial faculties and different religiously-affiliated schooling companies.

Additional info for Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America

Sample text

And indeed, the danger of assuming that the terrorist is someone who belongs to one group overlooks the possibility that the terrorist could come from the so-called nonterrorist group. 47 The lesson here is that the enemy—especially the terrorist enemy—can very easily be a member of the in-group capitalizing on public scrutiny of out-group behavior. Decoupling “Terrorist” from “Immigrant”: An Enhanced Role for the Courts Immigration law is traditionally understood to encompass the rules that govern foreign citizens’ entry into and departure from the United States, and may therefore be seen as an important domestic arm of the nation’s foreign policy power.

38 Just as Chae Chan Ping and Fong Yue Ting appeared to have been driven by nativistic sentiments fueled by race prejudice against the Chinese,39 Knauff, Harisiades, and Mezei were decided under the specter of the burgeoning Cold War, when allegations of Communist Party affiliation were, for noncitizens, scarlet letters that could lead to summary exclusion. Just as it upheld the immigration powers of Congress and the executive against the asserted rights of Chinese nationals in the 1880–90s and foreign communist sympathizers in the 1950s, the Supreme Court has continued this trend against suspected terrorists in the late 1990s.

Indeed, the clause’s effect on naturalized citizens of color is not unlike the disparate effect of the disenfranchisement of felons on the African American community. Yet, when I ask my students whether they think a constitutional amendment to get rid of the birthright-naturalized citizenship distinction would pass, they are uniformly pessimistic about such a project. I am troubled by what such indifference suggests about America’s priorities when we are quick to racially profile post–September 11 despite its inaccuracy, and yet are unwilling to eliminate the birthright citizenship distinction in the Presidential Eligibility Clause despite its inanity.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.86 of 5 – based on 41 votes