Latest news with #WongKimArk
South China Morning Post
3 days ago
- General
- South China Morning Post
Book review: Chinese exclusion and mistreatment in 19th and 20th century America explored
The history of Chinese immigrants in America has always been about much more than one ethnic group. Advertisement As Michael Luo's Strangers in the Land: Exclusion, Belonging, and the Epic Story of the Chinese in America shows, understanding America's efforts to keep Chinese labourers out, and the violence enacted against those who got in, is essential to understanding the evolution of America's immigration system as we know it today. That is because restrictions against Chinese immigrants represented the first major flex in the modern era of the US federal government's power to control its borders. Chinese labourers were the first group to be barred from the entire country based on national origin, and lawsuits involving this group were often major tests of constitutional liberties – most notably the Supreme Court case of Wong Kim Ark in 1898, which established the right to birthright citizenship. Wong Kim Ark was born in California in 1873 to Chinese parents. After Wong was denied re-entry into the United States, the Supreme Court ruled that he was a US citizen by virtue of birth. Photo: SCMPost Time and time again, the treatment of this minority group served as a test of America's ability to live up to its own ideals of equality.
Associated Press
3 days ago
- Politics
- Associated Press
Book Review: Michael Luo tells the harrowing story of Chinese exclusion in America
The history of Chinese immigrants in America has always been about much more than one particular ethnic group. As Michael Luo's 'Strangers in the Land: Exclusion, Belonging and the Epic Story of the Chinese in America' demonstrates, understanding America's efforts to keep Chinese laborers out, and the violence enacted against those who stayed in, is essential to understanding the evolution of America's immigration system as we know it today. That's because restrictions against Chinese immigrants represented the first major flex in the modern era of the federal government's power to control its borders. Chinese laborers were the first group to be barred from the entire country based on national origin, and lawsuits involving this group were often major tests of constitutional liberties — most notably the Supreme Court case of Wong Kim Ark in 1898, which established the right to birthright citizenship. Time and time again, the treatment of this minority group served as a test of America's ability to live up to its own ideals of equality. As Massachusetts Sen. George Frisbie Hoar noted when he spoke out against the exclusionary legislation of the 1880s: 'We go boasting of our democracy, and our superiority, and our strength. The flag bears the stars of hope to all nations. A hundred thousand Chinese land in California and everything is changed.... The self-evident truth becomes a self-evident lie.' Luo's book covers over a century of history, from the 1840s to 1965. Immigration from China was largely unfettered at first, and Chinese laborers were essential to building the transcontinental railroad system — a truly epic part of the story, with thrilling descriptions of how men dangled in baskets off 2,000-foot precipices and set off charges that blasted open whole mountains. One witness wrote: 'When the debris had ceased to fall, the echoes were still reporting among the distant hills.' However, unemployment crises in the 1870s led white workers to jump on Chinese labor as the ultimate economic scapegoat. Chinese workers faced near-constant hate and harassment, ranging from the daily humiliation of stone-throwing children to outright massacres by angry mobs. Luo spends chapter after chapter meticulously documenting the disturbing details of 19th-century pogroms and race riots against Chinese communities in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Denver and Seattle. Despite the ugly violence, Luo also takes care to document the actions of good men and women who stood up to the mob. Take Charles Andrew Huntington, a 73-year-old reverend in Eureka, California, who helped stop a massacre against Chinese residents in 1885. He lectured an enraged crowd: 'If Chinamen have no character, white men ought to have some.' Fanatics still ran every Chinese person out of town. A Chinese Christian, Charley Way Lum, had stopped by Huntington's house to pray before he left, when men burst in and put a rope around his neck. Another minister, C.E. Rich, intervened: 'If you hang him, you'll hang him over my dead body.' Lum escaped on a ship to San Francisco. Anti-Chinese sentiment enjoyed widespread popularity among both parties and played a major role in national politics, as it was considered key to winning the electoral votes of the West Coast. Starting with the Page Act of 1875, Congress started passing Chinese exclusion laws that grew more draconian every year. The Page Act targeted Chinese women, several years earlier than Chinese men, due to the widespread prejudice that most of them were sex workers. Anti-Chinese fervor culminated in the 1892 Geary Act, which required every Chinese person in the U.S. to register with the government or be deported. Immigration restrictions began to ease only when China became an ally in World War II – showing how much the vagaries of the shifting geopolitical winds can blow back on people at home. One shortcoming of the book is that Luo devotes so many pages to documenting what was done to Chinese immigrants that there's comparatively little time spent on what they did for themselves, on who they were as individuals beyond victimhood. A few compelling portraits do stand out: men like Yung Wing, an avid football player and Yale graduate who devoted his life to helping boys from China receive a Western education; Joseph Tape, who fought for his daughter's right to enter public school in San Francisco; and Mamie Louise Leung of Los Angeles, the first Asian-American reporter to work at a major newspaper. The fact that Chinese-Americans remained in the United States at all, despite widespread prejudice and the whole force of federal immigration law working to keep them out at every turn, speaks to the incredible tenacity of the community. One anecdote encapsulates this determined spirit: a Chinese coal miner, Lao Chung, was shot during an 1885 attack in Rock Springs, Wyoming. He survived and continued working for decades, the bullet still lodged in his back. — Luo was a national writer at The Associated Press from 2001-03 but has not met the reviewer, who joined in 2022. ___ AP book reviews:
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Ending birthright citizenship would create the United States of Stateless Babies
The birthright citizenship case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court seems to have nothing to do with citizenship and everything to do with injunctions. A win for Department of Justice attorneys would, in fact, limit federal district courts' power to issue nationwide injunctions. As a by-product, such an outcome may also transform our country into the United States of Stateless Babies. The case arose in response to an executive order by President Donald Trump that, on its face, precludes birthright citizenship for any baby born here if the parents are living here illegally or visiting on a temporary visa. The Constitution has a different take: It insists on birthright citizenship for all babies born on American soil, regardless of parentage. More specifically, the order contradicts the express language of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause providing that '[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' The amendment was added to the Constitution in 1868. Thirty years later, the Court held in United States v. Wong Kim Ark that the clause means just what it says: Anyone born in America is a citizen of America. That longstanding constitutional rule is reflected in the standard practice of bestowing neonatal citizenship in hospital maternity wards and birthing centers across the nation. The Trumpian citizenship scheme is not feasible. Denial of birthright citizenship to the infants of undocumented parents (and visitors on a temporary visa) would mean that absolutely no baby born in our country would enjoy automatic birthright citizenship, either. Each newborn's status as an American citizen would be indeterminate at birth and for as long as it would take to establish the citizenship of the baby's parents. That is, all babies born in the United States would automatically be stateless — until proven otherwise. During oral argument in the current case, Justice Brett Kavanaugh rightly asked: 'What do hospitals do with a newborn? What do states do with a newborn?' What, indeed! Nobody knows how much time or how many government employees would be involved in ascertaining parental citizenship. Approximately 10,000 babies are born in this country each day; in 2023, well over 3 million babies were delivered domestically. The immense undertaking of investigating and perhaps adjudicating the citizenship of masses of parents — usually two to a baby — would inevitably require establishing a sizable bureaucracy at taxpayer expense. There are concerning health ramifications, too. The World Health Organization recommends that, immediately following childbirth, women need rest and sleep to recuperate. Scientific evidence shows that maternal psychological distress may impair lactation and breastfeeding. So, even if ICE agents were not hovering over postpartum couples, babies' undetermined citizenship and ongoing investigations would be inconsistent with the relatively lulling conditions needed for new mothers and their infants. Moreover, automatic statelessness will trigger a cascade of additional adverse effects. For example, the government would be unable to assign Social Security numbers to stateless babies, thereby depriving them of access to medical care and other important benefits. These harms would be inflicted on all families with newborns, even though experts say just 7% of babies born in America have undocumented parents. The mayhem of unraveling birthright citizenship would not be the kindly welcome that a civilized society should extend to its tiniest, most fragile denizens. There is something profoundly sad about the Trump administration's willingness to devalue and diminish the well-being of these innocents for the sake of furthering its unthinking immigration agenda. Susan H. Bitensky is a constitutional law professor at Michigan State University College of Law. She has published extensively on the topic of children's rights under the Constitution. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: We should not become the United States of Stateless Babies | Opinion
Time Business News
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Time Business News
Legal Firestorm Erupts as Trump Attacks Birthright Citizenship
Constitutional Experts, Human Rights Groups, and Lawmakers Mobilize as Amicus International Consulting Offers Lawful Alternatives for Vulnerable Families WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald J. Trump has ignited a nationwide legal and political crisis with his latest pledge to end birthright citizenship by executive order. The unprecedented move, announced as a cornerstone of his 2024 campaign, would deny U.S. citizenship to children born on American soil to undocumented immigrants — a direct challenge to more than 150 years of constitutional precedent. The announcement has drawn immediate and widespread condemnation. Civil liberties advocates, constitutional scholars, immigration attorneys, and international human rights organizations have warned that the proposed executive action would not only violate the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution but also thrust the nation into a legal battle with profound humanitarian consequences. 'You cannot erase the Constitution with a signature,' said civil rights attorney Maya Deshmukh. 'This proposal attacks the foundation of equal citizenship in America.' At the Heart: The 14th Amendment The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868 during Reconstruction, guarantees that 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' It was designed to ensure citizenship for formerly enslaved people and their descendants, and has since applied universally to all children born on U.S. soil. In the 1898 landmark Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark , the Court ruled that a child born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants legally barred from naturalization was a U.S. citizen by right of birth. That precedent has held for over a century. 'Wong Kim Ark remains binding precedent,' said Professor Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law School. 'No executive action can override the Constitution or the Supreme Court's interpretation.' Immediate Fallout: Legal and Political Response Within hours of Trump's announcement, prominent civil rights organizations, including the ACLU, MALDEF, and the National Immigration Law Center, condemned the plan and vowed to take legal action. 'This is an attempt to strip millions of children of their rights and cast entire communities into limbo,' said Ahilan Arulanantham, director of advocacy at the ACLU of Southern California. 'We will challenge this in court the minute it is signed.' Legal experts are unanimous that any such executive order would face immediate injunctions and would likely be struck down by the federal judiciary. Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) warned in Congress that the proposal would 'roll back civil rights by a century.' Even some Republicans voiced hesitation, with Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) stating, 'Birthright citizenship is settled law and should not be tampered with through executive fiat.' Real People, Real Risk: The Human Cost Case Study: The Herrera Family, Florida Diego and Carolina Herrera, undocumented immigrants from Venezuela, are raising three U.S.-born children. 'They pledge allegiance to this country,' Diego said. 'Now we're scared they'll be treated as outsiders in the only home they've ever known.' Case Study: Legal Residents in Legal Limbo Sana and Omid, lawful visa holders from Iran who reside in New Jersey, recently had a baby at a local hospital. 'We thought this birth meant our daughter would never feel like a foreigner,' Sana said. Now, we don't know what rights she'll have.' Statelessness and Global Ramifications If implemented, the order would likely leave thousands, potentially millions, of American-born children in a legal gray zone, effectively stateless. International law strongly opposes such outcomes. The U.S. is a signatory to the 1961 U.N. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, which prohibits arbitrarily stripping individuals of citizenship. Human rights organizations around the world condemned the announcement. Amnesty International said the plan 'violates fundamental human rights and undermines U.S. leadership in promoting citizenship equality.' 'This move aligns the U.S. with authoritarian regimes that manipulate nationality law to control demographics,' said Rosa García, senior legal adviser at Human Rights First. Amicus International Consulting: A Legal Lifeline in Uncertain Times As constitutional protections are criticized, Amicus International Consulting is expanding its services to help clients navigate the growing uncertainty surrounding legal identity, citizenship status, and long-term residency rights. Amicus offers fully legal and secure alternatives, including: Second citizenship and residency through ancestry, naturalization, and legal investment routes through ancestry, naturalization, and legal investment routes Name change and legal identity restructuring for at-risk individuals for at-risk individuals Digital privacy solutions to protect personal and biometric data to protect personal and biometric data Exit strategies and relocation planning for clients facing rising legal insecurity Case Study: U.S.–Mexican Family Secures Spanish Citizenship via Ancestry Amicus recently assisted a U.S.-born child of undocumented Mexican parents in securing dual citizenship in Spain using ancestry-based claims. 'We wanted a plan in case America turns its back on our child,' the mother said. 'Now we have one.' 'This is not about fear — it's about preparation,' said a representative from Amicus. 'We help people find lawful solutions when political systems become unpredictable.' 📞 Contact InformationPhone: +1 (604) 200-5402Email: info@ Website:
South China Morning Post
23-05-2025
- Politics
- South China Morning Post
His Chinese-American ancestor defined birthright citizenship. Now he fights to preserve it
Few Americans knew of Norman Wong, a 75-year-old retired carpenter living quietly in Brentwood, California, until a presidential executive order transformed him into an unlikely symbol of a new national battle over a core constitutional issue: who is an American? His face has appeared across major American news organizations in recent days. When the South China Morning Post interviewed Wong via video, a television crew was en route to his home, and a calendar in the background overflowed with interview requests. With a sheepish grin, Wong admitted he sometimes confused journalists' names with their media outlets. Amid the whirlwind of attention, Wong has resolved to remain a counterpoint to US President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship, a controversial proclamation now before the Supreme Court. 'This is the battle for, in a sense, the soul of America,' he said. 06:19 Chinese-American descendant of US citizenship rights fighter defends birthright citizenship Chinese-American descendant of US citizenship rights fighter defends birthright citizenship Though he is not part of any of the legal challenges to Trump's order, Wong has become a vocal defender and a living testament of the legacy of his great-grandfather, Wong Kim Ark, whose 1898 Supreme Court victory – in the face of discriminatory laws targeting Chinese immigrants – confirmed a cornerstone of American citizenship law: anyone born on US soil is a citizen. As a result of the landmark case, Wong's family and millions of other children from immigrant households over the decades since have become US citizens.
