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 differently invidious, and sometimes unconstitutional, discrimination at the foundation of race. whereas racial discrimination isn't legally appropriate this present day, profiling at the foundation of citizenship continues to be principally unchecked, and has actually 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 legislations, Victor C. Romero attracts our awareness to a “constitutional immigration legislations paradox” that reserves definite rights for U.S. voters merely, whereas concurrently purporting to regard everybody relatively below constitutional legislations despite citizenship.
As a naturalized Filipino American, Romero brings an outsider's point of view to Alienated, forcing us to examine constitutional immigration legislation from the vantage aspect 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 interpreting of the structure and advocates a brand new theoretical and useful strategy that protects the person rights of non-citizens with no sacrificing their personhood.
Read or Download Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America PDF
Best civil rights books
Be aware: it is a just a little shameful retail creation. Very readable, yet now not so good designed.
Originally released in 1964, The fight for Equality provides an incisive and vibrant examine the abolitionist stream and the criminal foundation it supplied to the civil rights move of the Nineteen Sixties. Pulitzer Prize'winning historian James McPherson explores the position performed through rights activists in the course of and after the Civil battle, and their evolution from despised enthusiasts into influential spokespersons for the novel wing of the Republican social gathering. saying that it was once no longer the abolitionists who didn't instill rules of equality, yet really the yank those who refused to stick with their management, McPherson increases questions on the stumbling blocks that experience lengthy hindered American reform events. This new Princeton Classics version marks the 50th anniversary of the book's preliminary book and features a new preface by way of the writer.
Describes landmark loose speech judgements of the best court docket whereas highlighting the problems of language, rhetoric, and verbal exchange that underlie them. on the intersection of communique and primary modification legislation live major questions: what's the speech we should defend, and why may still we safeguard it?
Why have Blacks received political empowerment in a few towns and in others remained subordinated or had their achievements rolled again? Why do a little towns have many Black leaders with multi-racial attraction whereas different towns have none? Subordination or Empowerment solutions those questions via distinct historic examinations of the Black fight for political strength in Chicago, Gary, Philadelphia, and Atlanta.
- My Father Said Yes: A White Pastor in Little Rock School Integration
- Love's Labor: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependency (Thinking Gender)
- Sex, Violence and Crime: Foucault and the 'Man' Question
- Orbit Theory: Proceedings
Additional info for Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America
3 As with any vague and ambiguous term, “loyal” might be best understood by way of example: The president of a nation is expected to be “loyal” to that nation; a terrorist, in contrast, is not. ” This search for the next terrorist has affected many of us most profoundly in the context of airport security. In an ideal world, perhaps, there would be a “terrorist screening device” through which all airport passengers would have to pass; it would search not only the person’s belongings for potentially dangerous weapons, but would also unerringly read the passenger’s mind to determine whether he or she plans to hijack the next flight—a souped-up “lie-detector test,” if you will.
Moreover, while national origin and race are not synonymous, we should be more skeptical of their intersectionality when used by the government to perpetuate subordination. S. Consular Officers should not favor Filipino mestizos (usually fairer-skinned persons of Spanish or American heritage) over Filipinos of aboriginal, Malayo-Polynesian, or Chinese stock. A legacy of European colonialism, favoritism for “whiter” individuals of the same race or citizenship is common among peoples as diverse as African Americans, Filipinos, and Latin Americans.
During World War II, as now, the public and government were willing to use proxies for disloyalty as a means of safeguarding national security, despite the cost to innocent persons swept into the dragnet. And, as Akram and Johnson contend, the government has gone beyond airport profiling to arrest and detain many Muslims in a sweep reminiscent of the Japanese internment. S. government arrested and detained roughly one thousand noncitizens, with Immigrants and the War on Terrorism after 9/11 | 29 Pakistanis and Egyptians most heavily represented.