Podcasts about Naturalization Act

Clay is joined by one of his favorite guests and favorite people, historian Joe Ellis of Vermont. The discussion is about the Trump administration's attempt to pull the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 out of the historical dust and apply it to what it regards as undesirable foreigners in the United States. Two Alien acts, the Sedition Act, and the Naturalization Act were passed by a Federalist Congress during a war scare in 1798, the so-called Quasi War. The Alien Enemies Act permitted the president to deport any foreign person he regarded as a national security threat, without due process, without a hearing public or private, and without the benefit of counsel. In the presidential campaign of 2024 Donald Trump declared that he would be invoking the Alien Enemies Act, which is still on the books. He has begun to deport what he regards as Venezuelan gang members and other undesirables (as he sees them). The federal courts now will have to determine if the Alien Enemies Act is a legal tool in President Trump's campaign to control immigration to the United States. Joe Ellis provides vital and essential historical context for this vexed issue. This interview was recorded on 22 March 2025.

Welcome to one of the most important episodes I've ever dropped on Fire and Soul. Since day one of this show, it's been my intention to bring you the most embodied leaders in their respective fields and today's guest is no exception.I came across Brandon Joe Williams on one of my fave podcasts six months ago where he was talking about common law and how to legally escape the free-range debt-slave matrix. I was honestly shocked at how deeply my soul felt activated by the content. The curiosity running through my nervous system felt more like a remembrance of my divine rights. I quickly knew I was destined to dive in and share it with you so that as many of us who choose to walk this path and get ourselves free, can do so together.That said, I also noticed I got really, really scared. The energetics around the 14th Amendment and how the Naturalization Act got us here, what that means, and how we've been enslaved since 1871, felt extremely heavy, dark and masculine. The profound programming of fear and anxiety was real and felt in my body...There had to be a softer, more feminine approach to embarking on this path of sovereignty. That studying, implementing, and embodying real law and taking the necessary actions to get free was no different than doing deep shadow work and was safe for me to feel. I knew the last three years of doing deep inner work and cultivating spiritual strength had prepared me for this voyage. And if you're reading this, I believe that to be true for you as well.I offer that to you because this show attracts incredibly bright and brave women on the path of awakening. And as we continue to peel back the layers of mind control and manipulation, my prayer is that we rise in courage and stand firm in our authentic power on the journey of reclaiming our collective divine destiny.Who knows... perhaps this conversation will spark something within you, like it did me this past spring, and you'll feel the call to dig a little deeper yourself!Alrighty, in addition to the systemic racism and 14th Amendment running America, Brandon also tell us:How to legally not be liable for taxesHow to exit the corrupt US CorporationWhat "United States" really means and so much moreBe prepared, friend. Today's dose is utterly mind blowing. I invite you to be open and curious. Know that many of the most common questions such as, How could this be true? If it were true, why aren't more people doing this? Is this lawful? Is it really legal?All of those questions get answered in a legal, diplomatic and feminine way. Let's journey!GUEST RESOURCESCheck out Brandon's free 2.0 Contract Killer course at:onestupidfuck.comIG: one.stupid.fuckYT: https://www.youtube.com/@onestupidfuck Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Diana and Nicole discuss finding immigration records for ancestors arriving in the United States after 1906. They provide a timeline of important immigration laws and their impacts, such as the 1906 establishment of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, the 1917 Immigration Act, the 1921 Emergency Quota Act, the 1924 National Origins Act, the 1945 War Brides Act, the 1948 Displaced Persons Act, the 1952 Immigration and Naturalization Act, and the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. They explain the importance of using census records, naturalization records, and other U.S. records to gather clues about an ancestor's immigration timeline. They discuss various types of immigration records, including passenger lists, hospital records, detainee lists, and more. Diana and Nicole share a case study on Birger Gustaf Soelberg, tracing his immigration from Sweden to the United States, his residency in Worcester, Massachusetts, his work as a seaman, and his eventual intended emigration to Canada in 1926. They highlight the importance of thorough research in multiple records to piece together an ancestor's immigration story. Links Back to the Basic with Immigration Records: 1906 Forward - https://familylocket.com/back-to-the-basic-with-immigration-records-1906-forward/ Sponsor – Newspapers.com For listeners of this podcast, Newspapers.com is offering new subscribers 20% off a Publisher Extra subscription so you can start exploring today. Just use the code “FamilyLocket” at checkout.  Research Like a Pro Resources Airtable Universe - Nicole's Airtable Templates - https://www.airtable.com/universe/creator/usrsBSDhwHyLNnP4O/nicole-dyer Airtable Research Logs Quick Reference - by Nicole Dyer - https://familylocket.com/product-tag/airtable/ Research Like a Pro: A Genealogist's Guide book by Diana Elder with Nicole Dyer on Amazon.com - https://amzn.to/2x0ku3d 14-Day Research Like a Pro Challenge Workbook - digital - https://familylocket.com/product/14-day-research-like-a-pro-challenge-workbook-digital-only/ and spiral bound - https://familylocket.com/product/14-day-research-like-a-pro-challenge-workbook-spiral-bound/ Research Like a Pro Webinar Series 2024 - monthly case study webinars including documentary evidence and many with DNA evidence - https://familylocket.com/product/research-like-a-pro-webinar-series-2024/ Research Like a Pro eCourse - independent study course -  https://familylocket.com/product/research-like-a-pro-e-course/ RLP Study Group - upcoming group and email notification list - https://familylocket.com/services/research-like-a-pro-study-group/ Research Like a Pro with DNA Resources Research Like a Pro with DNA: A Genealogist's Guide to Finding and Confirming Ancestors with DNA Evidence book by Diana Elder, Nicole Dyer, and Robin Wirthlin - https://amzn.to/3gn0hKx Research Like a Pro with DNA eCourse - independent study course -  https://familylocket.com/product/research-like-a-pro-with-dna-ecourse/ RLP with DNA Study Group - upcoming group and email notification list - https://familylocket.com/services/research-like-a-pro-with-dna-study-group/ Thank you Thanks for listening! We hope that you will share your thoughts about our podcast and help us out by doing the following: Write a review on iTunes or Apple Podcasts. If you leave a review, we will read it on the podcast and answer any questions that you bring up in your review. Thank you! Leave a comment in the comment or question in the comment section below. Share the episode on Twitter, Facebook, or Pinterest. Subscribe on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, or your favorite podcast app.

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latino-studies

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-west

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas.

Omar Valerio-Jiménez's book Remembering Conquest: Mexican Americans, Memory, and Citizenship (UNC Press, 2024) analyzes the ways collective memories of the US-Mexico War have shaped Mexican Americans' civil rights struggles over several generations. As the first Latinx people incorporated into the nation, Mexican Americans were offered US citizenship by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war. Because the 1790 Naturalization Act declared whites solely eligible for citizenship, the treaty pronounced Mexican Americans to be legally white. While their incorporation as citizens appeared as progress towards racial justice and the electorate's diversification, their second-class citizenship demonstrated a retrenchment in racial progress. Over several generations, civil rights activists summoned conquest memories to link Mexican Americans' poverty, electoral disenfranchisement, low educational attainment, and health disparities to structural and institutional inequalities resulting from racial retrenchments. Activists also recalled the treaty's citizenship guarantees to push for property rights, protection from vigilante attacks, and educational reform. Omar Valerio-Jiménez addresses the politics of memory by exploring how succeeding generations reinforced or modified earlier memories of conquest according to their contemporary social and political contexts. The book also examines collective memories in the US and Mexico to illustrate transnational influences on Mexican Americans and to demonstrate how community and national memories can be used strategically to advance political agendas. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a Text Message.Does it feel like your career or workplace is working against you because of your race? Are you clear about what "race" is? Join Whitney in this Asked and Answered episode about race and racial toxicity at work.Relying on research backed data (sources below) and her own experience as a Black American DEI professional and attorney, in this episode, Whitney answers your questions and covers:What is Race?What is the historical context of Race in the US?What do you mean by "racial toxicity," and what are real life examples of toxic work dynamics?What is racial discrimination?And importantly, Whitney provides concrete and actionable steps that you can take when faced with racial toxicity or racial discrimination at work. This week's episode kicks off a series of episodes strictly on racial toxicity! With so much in store over the next several weeks, make sure you start here to get clear on what we mean by "racial toxicity," and have a better understanding of the language used. Subscribe to Impostrix Podcast to get alerts when episodes are released. And don't forget to SHARE this episode with a friend, and let Whitney know what you think by leaving a review or rating the show. Visit ImpostrixPodcast.com to leave Whitney a voice message, subscribe to the monthly newsletter, or donate to the show!Sources:Go Deeper: Race Timeline from RACE - The Power of an IllusionDiscussing the Naturalization Act of 1790, the 1830 Indian Removal Act, Jim Crow, the "Alien Land Laws," and the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 (among other key points in history).Racial Identity and American Citizenship in the Court - The Asian American Education ProjectDiscussing Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178 (1922) and other landmark cases involving citizenship and naturalization for Asian immigrants. The State of Black Women in Corporate America (Lean In)Happy Equal Pay Day? Here are 6 charts showing why it's not much of a celebration citing to the National Partnership for Women and Families Report: What's the Wage Gap in the States? Implicit Bias - The Perception InstituteU.S. Equal Employment Opportunity I am a creative entrepreneur and want my fully customizable and attorney-created services contract. Sponsor:Smithers Law Group LLC, Your Trusted 360 General Counselwww.stulawgroup.com/contract-bank Wills for the PeopleAdvancing wealth equity through intentional, accessible, culturally responsive and transformative estate planning services and education. Available in Georgia only. www.willsforthepeoplega.cominfo@willsforthepeoplega.comSupport the Show. SUBSCRIBE to the Validating Voice NewsletterSUPPORT Impostrix Podcast

Does it feel like your career or workplace is working against you because of your race? Are you clear about what "race" is? Join Whitney in this Asked and Answered episode about race and racial toxicity at work. Relying on research backed data (sources below) and her own experience as a Black American DEI professional and attorney, in this episode, Whitney answers your questions and covers:What is Race? What is the historical context of Race in the US?What do you mean by "racial toxicity," and what are real life examples of toxic work dynamics?What is racial discrimination?And importantly, Whitney provides concrete and actionable steps that you can take when faced with racial toxicity or racial discrimination at work. This week's episode kicks off a series of episodes strictly on racial toxicity! With so much in store over the next several weeks, make sure you start here to get clear on what we mean by "racial toxicity," and have a better understanding of the language used. Subscribe to Impostrix Podcast to get alerts when episodes are released. And don't forget to SHARE this episode with a friend, and let Whitney know what you think by leaving a review or rating the show. Visit ImpostrixPodcast.com to leave Whitney a voice message, subscribe to the monthly newsletter, or donate to the show!Sources:Go Deeper: Race Timeline from RACE - The Power of an IllusionDiscussing the Naturalization Act of 1790, the 1830 Indian Removal Act, Jim Crow, the "Alien Land Laws," and the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 (among other key points in history).Racial Identity and American Citizenship in the Court - The Asian American Education ProjectDiscussing Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178 (1922) and other landmark cases involving citizenship and naturalization for Asian immigrants. The State of Black Women in Corporate America (Lean In)Happy Equal Pay Day? Here are 6 charts showing why it's not much of a celebration citing to the National Partnership for Women and Families Report: What's the Wage Gap in the States? Implicit Bias - The Perception InstituteU.S. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupport the showSUBSCRIBE to the Validating Voice NewsletterSUPPORT Impostrix Podcast

Today we talk to author Anthony Ocampo about his book BROWN AND GAY IN LA: The Lives of Immigrant Sons. The book focuses on the sons of “new” immigrants who arrived in the United States after the passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, BROWN AND GAY IN LA offers intimate and sometimes heartbreaking portraits of young men—Franklin, Armando, Rolando, Alvin, James, Dario, Edwin, Julio, and others—who struggle with the tensions between making their parents proud and their own sense of pride, with being viewed as normal by their family and becoming their own person.  We will be discussing the intersections of race, immigration and being gay, as well as an analysis of masculinity itself.  Anthony Ocampo is Professor of Sociology at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, and his work has been featured on NPR, NBC News, BuzzFeed, GQ, and in the Los Angeles Times With co-host Brody Levesque

Today we talk to author Anthony Ocampo about his book BROWN AND GAY IN LA: The Lives of Immigrant Sons. The book focuses on the sons of “new” immigrants who arrived in the United States after the passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, BROWN AND GAY IN LA offers intimate and sometimes heartbreaking portraits of young men—Franklin, Armando, Rolando, Alvin, James, Dario, Edwin, Julio, and others—who struggle with the tensions between making their parents proud and their own sense of pride, with being viewed as normal by their family and becoming their own person.  We will be discussing the intersections of race, immigration and being gay, as well as an analysis of masculinity itself.  Anthony Ocampo is Professor of Sociology at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, and his work has been featured on NPR, NBC News, BuzzFeed, GQ, and in the Los Angeles Times With co-host Brody Levesque

A note from Talking Taiwan host Felicia Lin:   Karen Lin is running as the Democratic candidate for Judge of the Civil Court in Queens, New York. Presently, Karen serves as Court Attorney-Referee in Kings County Surrogate's Court. She has also served as a Judge in the New York City Housing Court, adjudicating disputes between landlord and tenants in the Bronx and Manhattan.   We spoke about her current position as Surrogate Court Referee which involves estate settlement between family members and other matters such as guardianship, which was the central issue of the #FreeBritney movement involving Britney Spears.   Karen talked about what she loves about the legal profession and the challenges of working as a Judge in New York City's Housing Court, which is one of the busiest courts in the nation.   Karen also volunteers as Co-Chair of the Pro Bono and Community Service Committee of the Asian American Bar Association of New York (AABANY), she also spearheaded the Queens Pro Bono Clinic and helped to set up and manage AABANY's Remote Legal Clinic during the pandemic, to assist seniors and low-income families by phone.     Here's a little preview of what we talked about in this podcast episode:   Karen's connection to Taiwan What Karen wanted to be when she grew up and how she got interested in law as a career What Karen does in her current position as Surrogate Court Referee The #FreeBritney movement and guardianship What's been a challenging moment in Karen's career What's have a highlight or high point in Karen's career What it was like being a judge in housing court The confirmation hearing for Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson How the civil rights movement led to the Immigration and Naturalization Act (1965) How landlord tenant law in New York is very tenant friendly and could be reformed to protect individual homeowner landlords who are renting out a space in their homes The reform of landlord tenant law is an issue for lawmakers to address How New York City's Housing Court is one of the busiest courts in the nation How Karen's experience as a judge in New York City's Housing Court and Surrogate's Court has prepared her for being a civil court judge How in the Anglo American system (or common law system) that we have in the United States, a judge's ruling or interpretation of the law can affect or create laws Karen's pro bono work as Co-Chair of the Pro Bono and Community Service Committee of the Asian American Bar Association of New York (AABANY) Karen's involvement in setting up AABANY's Remote Legal Clinic during pandemic Her decision to step down as judge of the New York City Housing Court What a civil court judge does and can accomplish during their 10-year term How Karen would like to see greater access to legal advice and support for those who most need it Karen's mentors and advice on finding them If Karen would like to be a Supreme Court Judge The difference levels of the U.S. court system The importance of voting In Queens, NY Asian Americans are 25% of the population Karen is running in the Democratic primary, on June 28; only people registered as Democrats and who live in Queens can vote for Karen   Related Links: To view all related links for this article, click link below:  

Other than indigenous people, everyone in the US has immigrant blood. Yet immigration policy has been a heated political issue for decades. Hosts rose and Ruhani investigate the various aspects of immigration. Rose discusses how immigrants have limited access to healthy produce and how immigration has influenced the production of healthy foods. Ruhani shares the history of immigration in the United States. Immigrants come to the United States in the hope of finding a better life for themselves and their families, however, upon arrival, they lack essential services, healthcare, and resources. In California, immigrants make up more than 80 percent of the state's agricultural workforce. Other states like Washington State (72.6%), Florida (65.4%), and Oregon (60.7%), also have higher than average shares of immigrants in their agricultural workforce. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 abolished an earlier quota system based on national origin and established a new immigration policy based on reuniting immigrant families and attracting skilled labor to the United States. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which took over many immigration service and enforcement functions formerly performed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Immigrants contribute to life in America and we need to embrace, support, and appreciate the positive impact immigrants bring to our country. • Follow us: https://www.starstyleradio.com/expressyourselfteenradio • https://www.facebook.com/ExpressYourselfTeenRadio/ • https://www.facebook.com/BTSYAcharity/ • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expressyourselfradio/

Other than indigenous people, everyone in the US has immigrant blood. Yet immigration policy has been a heated political issue for decades. Hosts rose and Ruhani investigate the various aspects of immigration. Rose discusses how immigrants have limited access to healthy produce and how immigration has influenced the production of healthy foods. Ruhani shares the history of immigration in the United States. Immigrants come to the United States in the hope of finding a better life for themselves and their families, however, upon arrival, they lack essential services, healthcare, and resources. In California, immigrants make up more than 80 percent of the state's agricultural workforce. Other states like Washington State (72.6%), Florida (65.4%), and Oregon (60.7%), also have higher than average shares of immigrants in their agricultural workforce. The Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 abolished an earlier quota system based on national origin and established a new immigration policy based on reuniting immigrant families and attracting skilled labor to the United States. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which took over many immigration service and enforcement functions formerly performed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Immigrants contribute to life in America and we need to embrace, support, and appreciate the positive impact immigrants bring to our country. • Follow us: https://www.starstyleradio.com/expressyourselfteenradio • https://www.facebook.com/ExpressYourselfTeenRadio/ • https://www.facebook.com/BTSYAcharity/ • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/expressyourselfradio/

Milestones of national franchise changes 1789: The Constitution grants the states the power to set voting requirements. Generally, states limited this right to property-owning or tax-paying white males (about 6% of the population). 1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited citizenship to "free white persons." In practice, only white male property owners could naturalize and acquire the status of citizens, and the vote. 1792 to 1838: Free black males lose the right to vote in several Northern states including in Pennsylvania and in New Jersey. 1792 to 1856: Abolition of property qualifications for white men, from 1792 (New Hampshire) to 1856 (North Carolina) during the periods of Jeffersonian and Jacksonian democracy. However, tax-paying qualifications remained in five states in 1860—Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Delaware and North Carolina. They survived in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island until the 20th century. In the 1820 election, there were 108,359 ballots cast. Most older states with property restrictions dropped them by the mid-1820s, except for Rhode Island, Virginia and North Carolina. No new states had property qualifications although three had adopted tax-paying qualifications – Ohio, Louisiana, and Mississippi, of which only in Louisiana were these significant and long lasting. The 1828 presidential election was the first in which non-property-holding white males could vote in the vast majority of states. By the end of the 1820s, attitudes and state laws had shifted in favor of universal white male suffrage. Voter turnout soared during the 1830s, reaching about 80% of the adult white male population in the 1840 presidential election. 2,412,694 ballots were cast, an increase that far outstripped natural population growth, making poor voters a huge part of the electorate. The process was peaceful and widely supported, except in the state of Rhode Island where the Dorr Rebellion of the 1840s demonstrated that the demand for equal suffrage was broad and strong, although the subsequent reform included a significant property requirement for anyone resident but born outside of the United States. The last state to abolish property qualification was North Carolina in 1856. However, tax-paying qualifications remained in five states in 1860 – Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Delaware and North Carolina. They survived in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island until the 20th century. In addition, many poor whites were later disenfranchised. 1868: Citizenship is guaranteed to all persons born or naturalized in the United States by the Fourteenth Amendment, setting the stage for future expansions to voting rights. 1869–1920: Some states allow women to vote. Wyoming was the first state to give women voting rights in 1869. 1870: The Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents states from denying the right to vote on grounds of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude". Disfranchisement after Reconstruction era began soon after. Former Confederate states passed Jim Crow laws and amendments to effectively disfranchise African-American and poor white voters through poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses and other restrictions, applied in a discriminatory manner. During this period, the Supreme Court generally upheld state efforts to discriminate against racial minorities; only later in the 20th century were these laws ruled unconstitutional. Black males in the Northern states could vote, but the majority of African Americans lived in the South. 1887: Citizenship is granted to Native Americans who are willing to disassociate themselves from their tribe by the Dawes Act, making the men technically eligible to vote.

United States nationality law details the conditions in which a person holds United States nationality. In the United States, nationality is typically obtained through provisions in the U.S. Constitution, various laws, and international agreements. Citizenship is a right, not a privilege. While the domestic documents often use citizenship and nationality interchangeably, nationality refers to the legal means in which a person obtains a national identity and formal membership in a nation and citizenship refers to the relationship held by nationals who are also citizens. Individuals born in any of the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia or almost any inhabited territory are natural-born United States citizens. The sole exception is American Samoa, where individuals are typically non-citizen U.S. nationals at birth. Foreign nationals living in any state or qualified territory may naturalize after becoming permanent residents and meeting a residence requirement (normally five years). History. Constitutional foundation. Nationality defines the legal relationship between a person and a state or nation, specifying who is a member or subject of a particular nation. The rights and obligations of citizenship are defined by this relationship, as well as the protections to which nationals are entitled. Though nationality and citizenship are distinct and the United States recognizes the distinction between those who are entitled or not entitled to rights, its statutes typically use the words "citizen" and "citizenship" instead of "national" and "nationality". The Constitution of the United States did not define either nationality or citizenship, but in Article 1, section 8, clause 4 gave Congress the authority to establish a naturalization law. Before the American Civil War and adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, there was no other language in the Constitution dealing with nationality. Nationality laws 1790–1866. The first statute to define nationality and naturalization in the United States was the Naturalization Act of 1790. It limited those who were eligible to be nationals as free, white persons. Following the practices of English common law, the legal system of the United States absorbed coverture, or the assumption that a woman's loyalty and obligations to her spouse were more important than her loyalty and obligation to the nation. While the Nationality Act did not forbid a woman to have her own nationality, judicial rulings and custom on domestic matters established that infants, slaves, and women were unable to participate in public life, as a result of the belief that they lacked critical judgment and had no right to exercise free will or control property. Native Americans were considered to be subjects of foreign governments and per decisions like Dred Scott v Sandford (1857) were only eligible to become naturalized if they assimilated white culture. From 1802, only fathers were able to pass on their nationality to their children. The Naturalization Act of 1804 confirmed that a woman's nationality was dependent upon her marital status and the Naturalization Act of 1855 tied a wife's nationality, and that of her children, to her husband's. A wife who married a foreign husband in this period was assumed to have suspended her nationality in favor of his. She was able to repatriate upon termination of the marriage and resumption of residence in the United States. While the 1855 Act specified that foreign wives gained U.S. nationality, the law created confusion as to whether it required American women who married aliens to take the nationality of the spouse. For example, Nellie Grant, daughter of President Ulysses S Grant, reacquired her U.S. nationality in 1898 by an Act of Congress, after a divorce from a British husband.

We delve into the topic of Race in America from the point of view of 3 first generation Indian Americans. All came to the United States shortly after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and as a direct result of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. This Act abolished immigration quotas by country which had intended to limit people of color from entering the U.S. In part 2 of 3 of this series, the conversation continues as our participants talk about building careers as well as raising families in the United States and Canada. The period spans the Reagan era through the Obama period in the United States. They share their observations on racial justice and progress.

We delve into the topic of Race in America from the point of view of 3 first generation Indian Americans. All came to the United States in the 1960s shortly after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and as a direct result of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. This Act abolished immigration quotas by country which had intended to limit people of color while prioritizing western Europeans. In this final episode of the 3-part series, our participants reflect on the "swing" years from Trump to the present day. As they approach the end of their careers, they offer perspectives on a life lived in North America as people of color but not African Americans. They speak to their hopes, dreams and fears for their children and grandchildren.

"Christian Colonialism: The verb “to colonize” can be described as the process of appropriating a place or domain to establish political and economic control. Throughout history, nations have invaded not only their neighbors' lands, but also territories clear across the globe for their own use. During the practice, the dominant nation attempts to colonize not only indigenous peoples' domains (territorial imperialism), but also their minds, their customs, their language, in fact, their very way of life. In countries with a historical legacy of colonization, and even in those without this history, members of dominant groups have accumulated unearned privileges not accorded to others. Though the official terms “colonization,” “colonizer,” and “colonized” may have changed somewhat, nowhere in the world have we experienced a truly post-colonial society. Imperialism remains, though at times possibly in less visible forms. In 1455, Pope Nicholas called his Christian followers to “to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans,” take their possessions, and “reduce their persons to perpetual slavery.” This edict known as the Doctrine of Discovery gives license to the genocide of black, brown, and non-Christians across the world. It was the stimulus for Columbus' travels and is based on Christian white supremacy. Beginning the first day Europeans stepped foot on what has come to be known as “the Americas” up until this very day, decisions over who can enter the United States and who can eventually gain citizenship status has generally depended on issues of “race.” U.S. immigration systems have reflected and have served as this country's official “racial” policies at any given point in time. Europeans on the North and South American continents established their domination based on a program of exploitation, violence, kidnapping, and genocide against native populations. For example, the “Puritans” left England to the Americas to practice a “purer” form of Protestant Christianity. They believed they were divinely chosen to form “a biblical commonwealth” with no separation between religion and government. They tolerated no other faiths or interpretations of divine precepts. In fact, they murdered and expelled Quakers, Catholics, and others. The “American” colonies followed European perceptions of “race.” A 1705 Virginia statute, the “Act Concerning Servants and Slaves,” read: [N]o negroes, mulattos or Indians, Jew, Moor, Mahometan [Muslims], or other infidel, or such as are declared slaves by this act, shall, notwithstanding, purchase any christian (sic) white servant…. In 1790, the newly constituted United States Congress passed the Naturalization Act, which excluded all nonwhites from citizenship, including Asians, enslaved Africans, and Native Americans, the later whom they defined in oxymoronic terms as “domestic foreigners,” even though they had inhabited this land for thousands of years. The Congress did not grant Native Americans rights of citizenship until 1924 with the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act, though Asians continued to be denied naturalized citizenship status." --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/antonio-myers4/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/antonio-myers4/support

We delve into the topic of Race in America from the point of view of 3 first generation Indian Americans. All came to the United States shortly after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and as a direct result of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. This Act abolished immigration quotas by country which had intended to limit people of color from entering the U.S. In the first episode, the conversation spans the 1960s and 1970s from each family's move to the kids adjusting to school in a new country and culture. Our participants share personal stories of how they were treated and observations of the African American experience from a unique perspective - foreigners and people of color not of that group.

Milestones of national franchise changes. 1789: The Constitution grants the states the power to set voting requirements. Generally, states limited this right to property-owning or tax-paying white males (about 6% of the population). 1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 allows free white men born outside of the United States to become citizens, though not necessarily the right to vote. 1792–1838: Free black males lost the right to vote in several Northern states including in Pennsylvania and in New Jersey. 1792–1856: Abolition of property qualifications for white men, from 1792 (New Hampshire) to 1856 (North Carolina) during the periods of Jeffersonian and Jacksonian democracy. However, tax-paying qualifications remained in five states in 1860—Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and North Carolina. They survived in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island until the 20th century. In the 1820 election, there were 108,359 ballots cast. Most older states with property restrictions dropped them by the mid-1820s, except for Rhode Island, Virginia and North Carolina. No new states had property qualifications although three had adopted tax-paying qualifications – Ohio, Louisiana, and Mississippi, of which only in Louisiana were these significant and long lasting. The 1828 presidential election was the first in which non-property-holding white males could vote in the vast majority of states. By the end of the 1820s, attitudes and state laws had shifted in favor of universal white male suffrage. Voter turnout soared during the 1830s, reaching about 80% of the adult white male population in the 1840 presidential election. 2,412,694 ballots were cast, an increase that far outstripped natural population growth, making poor voters a huge part of the electorate. The process was peaceful and widely supported, except in the state of Rhode Island where the Dorr Rebellion of the 1840s demonstrated that the demand for equal suffrage was broad and strong, although the subsequent reform included a significant property requirement for anyone resident but born outside of the United States. The last state to abolish property qualification was North Carolina in 1856. However, tax-paying qualifications remained in five states in 1860 – Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and North Carolina. They survived in Pennsylvania and Rhode Island until the 20th century. In addition, many poor whites were later disenfranchised. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

The year 1924 was a watershed in American immigration. A victory for the eugenics movement, the Johnson-Reed Act established race-based quotas that succeeded in limiting the entry of Jews and Catholics from Southern and Eastern Europe, as well as strengthening restrictions already in place barring the entry of Asians and Africans. It would take an extraordinary political window following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy to overhaul the quota system through the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. By giving preference to family reunification and skilled workers, the legislation changed the demographics of the country, making it less European and less white. At the same time, it imposed the first numerical cap on Western Hemisphere immigration, making the U.S. less accessible for people coming from Mexico and other Latin American countries. What lessons can we draw from these two historic shifts in American immigration? Has the United States ever been the nation of immigrants that it purports to be? And in our polarized times, can we fashion a new national identity that embraces immigrants and their families? New York Times national editor Jia Lynn Yang, winner of the 11th annual Zócalo Public Square Book Prize for her debut book, “One Mighty and Irresistible Tide: The Epic Struggle Over American Immigration, 1924-1965,” visited Zócalo to discuss how immigration laws have changed the American population, our communities, and the country’s sense of itself. This online event was moderated by Tomás Jiménez, professor of Sociology at Stanford University and author of “The Other Side of Assimilation: How Immigrants are Changing American Life.” Read more about Yang here: https://zps.la/3n7tKuY Angelica Esquivel, winner of the 10th Annual Zócalo Poetry Prize, delivered a public reading of her winning poem, “La Mujer,” prior to the lecture. Read more about Esquivel here: https://zps.la/3xgB6Rq For a full report on the live discussion, check out the Takeaway: https://zps.la/3wnxps2 Visit https://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/ to read our articles and learn about upcoming events. Twitter: https://twitter.com/thepublicsquare Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thepublicsquare/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/zocalopublicsquare LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/z-calo-public-square

Freedom's Fault Lines: Tales of Race and Gender explores the stories of race (black, brown, red and white) in America and women's quest for full citizenship. From Jamestown 1619 to the Naturalization Act of 1790 limiting citizenship to “any…free white person” to The Trail of Tears to the Civil War; from The Lost Cause, Jim Crow, the Klu Klux Klan and the Civil Rights Movement of the middle-twentieth century to Steve Bannon and Breitbart News to Black Lives Matter and the Washington Redskins & Cleveland Indians changing their names; from Abigail Adams request that the founders “remember the ladies” to Seneca Falls to the 19th Amendment and Second Wave Feminism and Hilary Clinton winning the presidential popular vote by almost three million votes – it's all here: Freedom's Faultlines: Stories of Race and Genderas Americans continually struggled with one another about who was excluded, who was included in “We the People…”

Produced by Michael DrittoWritten by Claire Malkie and Michael DrittoTheme Music by Terrance JacksonTransition Music by Kristina WalterHeadline Music by SoundEffectsFactory on YoutubeJoke submissions by Connor Morehouse Theatre in the Dark's A War of the Worlds:  https://www.theatreinthedark.com/REFERENCES AND RESOURCESACLU. (2014, May 1). Ohio Complaint. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/ohio_complaint.pdfACLU. (2020). Know Your Rights | Voter Intimidation. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_pdf_file/kyr-voterintimidation-v03.pdfACLU. (2020). Voting Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/issues/voting-rights?redirect=voting-rightsACLU. (2020, February 3). Block the Vote: Voter Suppression in 2020. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020/Anthony, S. B. (2017, February 15). Anthony, "Is It a Crime...," Speech Text. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/anthony-is-it-a-crime-speech-text/ASCSA. (2010). The Unenfranchised II - Slaves and Resident Aliens. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from http://www.agathe.gr/democracy/slaves_and_resident_aliens.htmlBall, T., & Dagger, R. (2020, January 30). Conservatism. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/conservatismBarksdale, F. (2015, April 26). The Long and Short of Voting Lines in North Carolina. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/promoting-access-ballot/long-and-short-voting-lines-north-carolina?redirect=blog/voting-rights/long-and-short-voting-lines-north-carolinaBrennan Center. (2017, January 31). Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/debunking-voter-fraud-mythBriggs, A. (2018, November 01). How the Founding Fathers understood U.S. citizenship. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2018/10/birthright-citizenship-explainer-united-states-history/Brophy, A. (n.d.). Guinn v. United States (1915): The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=GU001Cartledge, P. (2011, February 17). History - Ancient History in depth: Critics and Critiques of Athenian Democracy. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/greekcritics_01.shtmlCartwright, M. (2020, August 29). Ostracism. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ancient.eu/Ostracism/Chen, M. K., Haggag, K., Pope, D., & Rohla, R. (2019). Racial Disparities in Voting Wait Times: Evidence from Smartphone Data. doi:10.3386/w26487City of DC. (n.d.). Why Statehood for DC. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://statehood.dc.gov/page/why-statehood-dcConstitution Center. (2015). The 23rd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-xxiiiCraig Timberg, I. (2020, August 26). Black voters are being targeted in disinformation campaigns, echoing the 2016 Russian playbook. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/26/race-divisions-highlighted-disinformation-2016/Dahl, R. (2020, February 19). The Roman Republic. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/democracy/The-Roman-RepublicDEMOs. (2020). Combatting Wrongful Voter Purges: A Toolkit. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.demos.org/policy-briefs/combatting-wrongful-voter-purges-toolkitDiAngelo, R. J. (2018). White fragility: Why it's so hard for White people to talk about racism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.DOJ. (2017, July 28). History Of Federal Voting Rights Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.justice.gov/crt/history-federal-voting-rights-lawsThe Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2011, November 25). Civitas. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/civitasFussell, M. A. (2016, April 15). Dead Men Bring No Claims: How Takings Claims Can Provide Redress for Real Property Owning Victims of Jim Crow Race Riots. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3652&context=wmlrHaberman, M., & Rogers, K. (2020, August 18). On Centennial of 19th Amendment, Trump Pardons Susan B. Anthony. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/trump-susan-b-anthony-pardon.htmlHarris, A. (2020, July 02). The Voting Disaster Ahead. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/voter-suppression-novembers-looming-election-crisis/613408/History.com Editors. (2010, February 16). The 26th Amendment. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/the-26th-amendmentHistory.com Editors. (2010, March 09). Susan B. Anthony. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/womens-history/susan-b-anthonyHistory.com Editors. (2018, February 28). Jim Crow Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/early-20th-century-us/jim-crow-lawsHo, R. (2012, November 15). The History of Black Voting Rights - From the 1700's to Present Day. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://originalpeople.org/the-history-of-black-voting-rights-from-the-1700s-to-present-day/Imai, S. (2013, March 19). Naturalization Act of 1790. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from http://encyclopedia.densho.org/Naturalization_Act_of_1790/James, M. (2015, March 08). Federalist Papers No. 10. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/the-federalist-papers/federalist-papers-no-10/Jefferson, T. (1958). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison | The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/thomas-jefferson-james-madisonKim, Y. (2018, November 20). Voter Suppression Has Gone Digital. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voter-suppression-has-gone-digitalKraut, R. (2020, May 06). The perceived fragility of Athenian democracy. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Socrates/The-perceived-fragility-of-Athenian-democracyLiptak, A. (2013, June 25). Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.htmlLitt, D. (2020, June 18). The Racist History of Voter Registration. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://time.com/5855885/voter-registration-history-race/LOC. (n.d.). 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Primary Documents in American History: Introduction. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://guides.loc.gov/15th-amendmentLOC. (n.d.). Voting Rights for Native Americans. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/voting-rights-native-americans.htmlMcCarthy, R. (2020, July 16). "Outright Lies": Voting Misinformation Flourishes on Facebook. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.propublica.org/article/outright-lies-voting-misinformation-flourishes-on-facebookMonticello. (2020). Quotations on the Jefferson Memorial. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/quotations-jefferson-memorialNat'l Archives. (n.d.). 19th Amendment to the Constitution: Women's Right To Vote. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=falseNDI. (2019, May 20). Disinformation and Electoral Integrity. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ndi.org/sites/default/files/Disinformation and Electoral Integrity_NDI_External_Updated May 2019 (1).pdfPTV. (n.d.). Election Protection – Nonpartisan Volunteers To Stop Voter Suppression. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://protectthevote.net/Roos, D. (2012, May 15). How Voter Suppression Works. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://people.howstuffworks.com/voter-suppression.htmRoot, A. (2020, July 8). How Partisan Gerrymandering Limits Voting Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/2020/07/08/487426/partisan-gerrymandering-limits-voting-rights/Rosalind Helderman, J. (2020, August 22). Trump's suggestion of deploying law enforcement officials to monitor polls raises specter of voting intimidation. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-suggestion-of-deploying-law-enforcement-officials-to-monitor-polls-raises-specter-of-intimidation/2020/08/21/4ff6407a-e3bb-11ea-8dd2-d07812bf00f7_story.htmlRowen, B. (2017, February 18). U.S. Voting Rights. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.infoplease.com/history/us/us-voting-rightsSinclair, R. K. (1993). Democracy and partecipation in Athens (p. 25). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Sullivan, A. (2019, September 10). Southern U.S. states have closed 1,200 polling places in recent years: Rights group. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-locations/southern-us-states-have-closed-1200-polling-places-in-recent-years-rights-group-idUSKCN1VV09JTotenberg, N. (2020, July 17). Supreme Court Deals Major Blow To Felons' Right To Vote In Florida. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.npr.org/2020/07/17/892105780/supreme-court-deals-major-blow-to-ex-felons-right-to-vote-in-floridaUN. (1992). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspxUnderhill, W. (2020, August 25). Voter Identification Requirements: Voter ID Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspxUS Supreme Court. (2013, June 25). Shelby County v. Holder. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdfUSA govt. (n.d.). Who Can and Can't Vote in U.S. Elections. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.usa.gov/who-can-voteVasilogambros, M. (2018, March 21). Thousands Lose Right to Vote Under 'Incompetence' Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-lawsVasilogambros, M. (2018, September 5). Polling Places in Black Communities Continue to Close Ahead of November Elections. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/sl-polling-place-close-ahead-of-november-elections-black-voters.htmlWasson, D. (2020, August 26). Roman Citizenship. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ancient.eu/article/859/roman-citizenship/Wikipedia. (2020, August 26). Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Episode NotesProduced by Michael DrittoWritten by Claire Malkie and Michael DrittoTheme Music by Terrance JacksonTransition Music by Kristina WalterHeadline Music by SoundEffectsFactory on YoutubeReferences & ResourcesACLU. (2014, May 1). Ohio Complaint. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/ohio_complaint.pdfACLU. (2020). Know Your Rights | Voter Intimidation. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_pdf_file/kyr-voterintimidation-v03.pdfACLU. (2020). Voting Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/issues/voting-rights?redirect=voting-rightsACLU. (2020, February 3). Block the Vote: Voter Suppression in 2020. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020/Anthony, S. B. (2017, February 15). Anthony, "Is It a Crime...," Speech Text. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/anthony-is-it-a-crime-speech-text/ASCSA. (2010). The Unenfranchised II - Slaves and Resident Aliens. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from http://www.agathe.gr/democracy/slaves_and_resident_aliens.htmlBall, T., & Dagger, R. (2020, January 30). Conservatism. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/conservatismBarksdale, F. (2015, April 26). The Long and Short of Voting Lines in North Carolina. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/promoting-access-ballot/long-and-short-voting-lines-north-carolina?redirect=blog/voting-rights/long-and-short-voting-lines-north-carolinaBrennan Center. (2017, January 31). Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/debunking-voter-fraud-mythBriggs, A. (2018, November 01). How the Founding Fathers understood U.S. citizenship. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2018/10/birthright-citizenship-explainer-united-states-history/Brophy, A. (n.d.). Guinn v. United States (1915): The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=GU001Cartledge, P. (2011, February 17). History - Ancient History in depth: Critics and Critiques of Athenian Democracy. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/greekcritics_01.shtmlCartwright, M. (2020, August 29). Ostracism. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ancient.eu/Ostracism/Chen, M. K., Haggag, K., Pope, D., & Rohla, R. (2019). Racial Disparities in Voting Wait Times: Evidence from Smartphone Data. doi:10.3386/w26487City of DC. (n.d.). Why Statehood for DC. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://statehood.dc.gov/page/why-statehood-dcConstitution Center. (2015). The 23rd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-xxiiiCraig Timberg, I. (2020, August 26). Black voters are being targeted in disinformation campaigns, echoing the 2016 Russian playbook. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/08/26/race-divisions-highlighted-disinformation-2016/Dahl, R. (2020, February 19). The Roman Republic. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/democracy/The-Roman-RepublicDEMOs. (2020). Combatting Wrongful Voter Purges: A Toolkit. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.demos.org/policy-briefs/combatting-wrongful-voter-purges-toolkitDiAngelo, R. J. (2018). White fragility: Why it's so hard for White people to talk about racism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.DOJ. (2017, July 28). History Of Federal Voting Rights Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.justice.gov/crt/history-federal-voting-rights-lawsThe Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2011, November 25). Civitas. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/civitasFussell, M. A. (2016, April 15). Dead Men Bring No Claims: How Takings Claims Can Provide Redress for Real Property Owning Victims of Jim Crow Race Riots. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3652&context=wmlrHaberman, M., & Rogers, K. (2020, August 18). On Centennial of 19th Amendment, Trump Pardons Susan B. Anthony. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/trump-susan-b-anthony-pardon.htmlHarris, A. (2020, July 02). The Voting Disaster Ahead. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/voter-suppression-novembers-looming-election-crisis/613408/History.com Editors. (2010, February 16). The 26th Amendment. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/the-26th-amendmentHistory.com Editors. (2010, March 09). Susan B. Anthony. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/womens-history/susan-b-anthonyHistory.com Editors. (2018, February 28). Jim Crow Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.history.com/topics/early-20th-century-us/jim-crow-lawsHo, R. (2012, November 15). The History of Black Voting Rights - From the 1700's to Present Day. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://originalpeople.org/the-history-of-black-voting-rights-from-the-1700s-to-present-day/Imai, S. (2013, March 19). Naturalization Act of 1790. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from http://encyclopedia.densho.org/Naturalization_Act_of_1790/James, M. (2015, March 08). Federalist Papers No. 10. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/the-federalist-papers/federalist-papers-no-10/Jefferson, T. (1958). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison | The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/thomas-jefferson-james-madisonKim, Y. (2018, November 20). Voter Suppression Has Gone Digital. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/voter-suppression-has-gone-digitalKraut, R. (2020, May 06). The perceived fragility of Athenian democracy. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Socrates/The-perceived-fragility-of-Athenian-democracyLiptak, A. (2013, June 25). Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.htmlLitt, D. (2020, June 18). The Racist History of Voter Registration. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://time.com/5855885/voter-registration-history-race/LOC. (n.d.). 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Primary Documents in American History: Introduction. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://guides.loc.gov/15th-amendmentLOC. (n.d.). Voting Rights for Native Americans. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/voting-rights-native-americans.htmlMcCarthy, R. (2020, July 16). "Outright Lies": Voting Misinformation Flourishes on Facebook. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.propublica.org/article/outright-lies-voting-misinformation-flourishes-on-facebookMonticello. (2020). Quotations on the Jefferson Memorial. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/quotations-jefferson-memorialNat'l Archives. (n.d.). 19th Amendment to the Constitution: Women's Right To Vote. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=falseNDI. (2019, May 20). Disinformation and Electoral Integrity. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ndi.org/sites/default/files/Disinformation and Electoral Integrity_NDI_External_Updated May 2019 (1).pdfPTV. (n.d.). Election Protection – Nonpartisan Volunteers To Stop Voter Suppression. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://protectthevote.net/Roos, D. (2012, May 15). How Voter Suppression Works. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://people.howstuffworks.com/voter-suppression.htmRoot, A. (2020, July 8). How Partisan Gerrymandering Limits Voting Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/2020/07/08/487426/partisan-gerrymandering-limits-voting-rights/Rosalind Helderman, J. (2020, August 22). Trump's suggestion of deploying law enforcement officials to monitor polls raises specter of voting intimidation. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-suggestion-of-deploying-law-enforcement-officials-to-monitor-polls-raises-specter-of-intimidation/2020/08/21/4ff6407a-e3bb-11ea-8dd2-d07812bf00f7_story.htmlRowen, B. (2017, February 18). U.S. Voting Rights. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.infoplease.com/history/us/us-voting-rightsSinclair, R. K. (1993). Democracy and partecipation in Athens (p. 25). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Sullivan, A. (2019, September 10). Southern U.S. states have closed 1,200 polling places in recent years: Rights group. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-locations/southern-us-states-have-closed-1200-polling-places-in-recent-years-rights-group-idUSKCN1VV09JTotenberg, N. (2020, July 17). Supreme Court Deals Major Blow To Felons' Right To Vote In Florida. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.npr.org/2020/07/17/892105780/supreme-court-deals-major-blow-to-ex-felons-right-to-vote-in-floridaUN. (1992). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspxUnderhill, W. (2020, August 25). Voter Identification Requirements: Voter ID Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspxUS Supreme Court. (2013, June 25). Shelby County v. Holder. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdfUSA govt. (n.d.). Who Can and Can't Vote in U.S. Elections. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.usa.gov/who-can-voteVasilogambros, M. (2018, March 21). Thousands Lose Right to Vote Under 'Incompetence' Laws. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-lawsVasilogambros, M. (2018, September 5). Polling Places in Black Communities Continue to Close Ahead of November Elections. Retrieved August 31, 2020, from https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/sl-polling-place-close-ahead-of-november-elections-black-voters.htmlWasson, D. (2020, August 26). Roman Citizenship. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://www.ancient.eu/article/859/roman-citizenship/Wikipedia. (2020, August 26). Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Retrieved August 30, 2020, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Donald Trump has called Mexican migrants criminals and rapists, vowed to build a "beautiful" wall along the southern border, and presided over traumatic family separations among asylum seekers. But nativist ideology in U.S. politics — and policy — is nothing new. Immigration scholar Erika Lee walks Will and Siva through America's spotty record as a nation of immigrants, from the Naturalization Act of 1790, which barred nonwhite people from becoming citizens, to the Trump administration's Muslim ban in 2017.

In this episode, Emma looks at the relationship with American Indians in the new American Republic for your APUSH exam. She also looks at the formation of the Democrat-Republican and Federalist political parties. Ideal for preparing you for your AP US History exam. Click here for the full course, or visit this link: http://bit.ly/2O1gaJx

What is the Supreme Court case really about concerning DACA? Michael explains that the key element of the case is whether or not the Immigration and Naturalization Act gives discretion to the Executive Branch (i.e. the President) to choose whether or not to enforce deportation laws against DACA individuals. How the court decides will depend on whether the justices read the plain meaning of the statute. There is also a “reliance” issue but Michael says not to focus on that issue until the court renders its opinion.

On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Nielsen v. Preap (and its companion case Wilcox v. Khoury), both of which consider the extent to which the mandatory detention provision of the Immigration and Naturalization Act applies to defendants who were not arrested by immigration officials immediately upon their release from criminal custody.Aliens who are arrested in order to be removed from the United States typically can seek release or parole on bond while any dispute about their removability is being resolved. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)(1), however, creates an exception: aliens who have committed certain crimes or have a connection to terrorism must be arrested when released from custody relating to their criminal charges, and almost always held without bond until the question of removal is settled.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit interpreted this mandatory detention provision to apply only when the alien is arrested immediately after release from prison. If a short period of time intervenes, the court concluded, the alien must be allowed the chance to apply for release on bond or parole.By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and remanded the case. Respondent aliens who fall within the scope of § 1226(c)(1), the Court held, can be detained even if federal officials did not arrest them immediately upon release.Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, III-A, III-B-1, and IV, and an opinion with respect to Parts II and III-B-2, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Gorsuch joined. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined.To discuss the case, we have Greg Brower, Shareholder, Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, Shreck.

On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Nielsen v. Preap (and its companion case Wilcox v. Khoury), both of which consider the extent to which the mandatory detention provision of the Immigration and Naturalization Act applies to defendants who were not arrested by immigration officials immediately upon their release from criminal custody.Aliens who are arrested in order to be removed from the United States typically can seek release or parole on bond while any dispute about their removability is being resolved. Title 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)(1), however, creates an exception: aliens who have committed certain crimes or have a connection to terrorism must be arrested when released from custody relating to their criminal charges, and almost always held without bond until the question of removal is settled.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit interpreted this mandatory detention provision to apply only when the alien is arrested immediately after release from prison. If a short period of time intervenes, the court concluded, the alien must be allowed the chance to apply for release on bond or parole.By a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and remanded the case. Respondent aliens who fall within the scope of § 1226(c)(1), the Court held, can be detained even if federal officials did not arrest them immediately upon release.Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, III-A, III-B-1, and IV, and an opinion with respect to Parts II and III-B-2, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Gorsuch joined. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined.To discuss the case, we have Greg Brower, Shareholder, Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, Shreck.

Today's Rapid Response Friday takes a look at the recent Trump Administration memorandum "clarifying" the rules on military citizenship for children born to U.S. employees -- largely, those in the armed forces -- serving overseas. Is it as bad as you've heard? (Yes.) Is it actually worse than that? (Yes.) First, though, we continue to revisit the apportionment question discussed in Episode 307. Have we finally crowdsourced a solution? The answer may surprise you! After that, it's time for a deep dive into the latest policy manual update from the department of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services "clarifying" that servicemembers living overseas don't actually count as "living in the United States." Will this cause Trump-supporting military members to vote for Elizabeth Warren in 2020? (No.) Should it? (Yes.) Is it way, way worse than you could possibly imagine? Oh yes. After that, it's time for a very brief Andrew Was Wrong (the best kind!). Then, it's time for an all-new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam, in which we have... something approaching "Don't Take Legal Advice From A Podcast" Law? You won't want to miss this question involving a disgruntled landlord and a put-upon law student. Can Thomas break his losing streak? Listen and find out! Appearances None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links We first covered the potential apportionment crisis in Episode 307. You can read the latest policy manual update from the department of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for yourself. The relevant legal provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act are 8 U.S.C. § 1401, 8 U.S.C § 1431, and 8 U.S.C. § 1433. This is the August 15th, 2019 story about how the Trump administration continues to use the "out-of-wedlock" rule against LGBTQ couples. Finally, this is the garbage, racist National Review article on birthright citizenship, and this is U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S> 649 (1898). -Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law -Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs -Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community! -For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki -And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

Dr. Maytha Alhassen is a Syrian-American journalist, poet and scholar, working to bridge the worlds of social justice, academic research, popular culture and healing arts. And on this episode of CTZN Podcast, she schools us on the history of immigration and white domination in America.Learn more about MayFollow herIf this episode resonates for you, we’d love for you to take a screenshot add tag us on Instagram stories @ctznwell and @maythaalhassen, and click below to tweet:To be an ally is to testify and bear witness. Dr. @maythaalhassen schools us on the history of #immigration and white domination in America on this ep of #CTZN Podcast. Check it out: ctznwell.org/ctznpodcast @kkellyyoga @ctznwellMore about this episode:When talking about Muslim bans or immigration issues, Dr. Maytha Alhassen - Syrian journalist, poet, scholar and healer - says that it’s not about whether immigrants are welcome or not. It's about white supremacy.Trump’s travel ban was not the beginning but a continuation of a legacy of immigration restrictions and bans in America. And it began with the Naturalization Act of 1790 which said only free white people could be citizens of this country.What we are witnessing right now - with travel bans and family separation and caged children and overflowing, unsafe, unsanitary concentrations camps - was built on that legacy. And witnessing is exactly what we need to do. Not the kind of empathy that centers our feelings of others pain and just sits there. But the kind that takes action because of what has been witnessed.The word in Arabic is Shahada - which translates directly to “act of witness and testimony.” May calls it a kind of engaged “with-ness,” one that is interdependent, active and engaged. One that understands that we all have a stake in transforming systems of oppression because we are all connected.And she leaves us with the critical question and contemplation: Who is witnessing what is going on all around us? And what will we do about it? This conversation is real-time and essential. Take a listen.Join CTZNWELL on PatreonFollow CTZNWELL on InstagramSign up for CTZNWELL’s weekly email WELLread and check out our free action guides at ctznwell.org.

In this fourth episode, we’ve gathered memories from school. While deciding on themes for each episode, we remembered the many stories in our archives of navigating public and private schools in Queens. We began to reflect on the political, economic, religious, and social forces that shape what and how we learn. We thought about classrooms and textbooks, student activities, school funding, and the government’s role in education. We recall the long history of U.S. legislation tying together schooling and migration. This includes the now-repealed Naturalization Act of 1906 mandating English language proficiency for naturalized citizenship, the Immigration Act of 1990 shifting preference to formally credentialed visa applicants, and, more recently, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, or DACA, requiring formal education for eligibility. With the collections of personal histories in this episode, we consider how the movement of people impacts how we learn. Learn more about Queens Memory at http://queensmemory.org.

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, we discourage President Trump from working closely with radical libertarians Charles and David Koch's plan for amnesty. We must stem the flow of illegal immigration and strengthen border security, doing otherwise risks a potential loss of conservative supporters in his base. Republicans must stop running from the Democrats when they start pushing; waffling here could cost Trump his presidency. Mitch McConnell has exploded the debt and done nothing the entire time he's been in Congress to fix our illegal immigration problem. Government is not the answer. Conservatives must stop this! Using the National Emergencies Act, the Immigration and Naturalization Act, and other laws is not a cause for alarm. No one balked at its use over the past 43 years; it’s not like Trump is declaring martial law or creating new laws—he's simply addressing a national emergency at the border. Also, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, blasts the idea of healthcare for all, as leftists Sen Kamala Harris and Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have promoted, saying it’s a bad idea because it would destroy an entire industry and is obviously unaffordable. Perhaps Harris should visit Auschwitz to see what happens when unarmed citizens are attacked by the third Reich, instead of suggesting that Americans be disarmed. Finally, historian Victor Davis Hanson calls in to discuss the state of progressivism from the point of humanity in his new column "The Progressive Race to the Bottom." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, we discourage President Trump from working closely with radical libertarians Charles and David Koch's plan for amnesty. We must stem the flow of illegal immigration and strengthen border security, doing otherwise risks a potential loss of conservative supporters in his base. Republicans must stop running from the Democrats when they start pushing; waffling here could cost Trump his presidency. Mitch McConnell has exploded the debt and done nothing the entire time he's been in Congress to fix our illegal immigration problem. Government is not the answer. Conservatives must stop this! Using the National Emergencies Act, the Immigration and Naturalization Act, and other laws is not a cause for alarm. No one balked at its use over the past 43 years; it’s not like Trump is declaring martial law or creating new laws—he's simply addressing a national emergency at the border. Also, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, blasts the idea of healthcare for all, as leftists Sen Kamala Harris and Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have promoted, saying it’s a bad idea because it would destroy an entire industry and is obviously unaffordable. Perhaps Harris should visit Auschwitz to see what happens when unarmed citizens are attacked by the third Reich, instead of suggesting that Americans be disarmed. Finally, historian Victor Davis Hanson calls in to discuss the state of progressivism from the point of humanity in his new column "The Progressive Race to the Bottom." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On October 10, 2018, the Supreme Court heard argument in Nielsen v. Preap, a case involving the exemption of a criminal alien from mandatory detention without bond due to a delay in arrest after release from criminal custody. As codified, § 1226(c) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (“INA”) provides for the mandatory detention of criminal aliens “when [they are] released” from criminal custody, and for the holding of these aliens without bond. The three plaintiffs in this case are lawful permanent residents who have committed crimes that could lead to their removal from the United States but after serving their criminal sentence were released and returned to their families and communities in the United States; however, years later, each was arrested by immigration authorities and detained without bond hearings under § 1226(c). The plaintiffs filed a class action petition for habeas relief in district court arguing that since they were not detained “when...released” from criminal custody, they are not subject to mandatory detention under § 1226(c). The district court granted their motion for class certification, issued a preliminary injunction requiring the government to provide all class members with bond hearings under § 1226(a), and concluded that under § 1226(c) aliens can be held without bound only if taken into immigration custody immediately upon release from criminal custody, not if there is a lengthy gap after their release. The government appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the statute “does not suggest that immigration officials lose authority if they delay.” The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s class certification order and preliminary injunction, and held that the mandatory detention provision of § 1226(c) applies only to those criminal aliens detained promptly after their release from criminal custody, not to those detained long after. The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether a criminal alien becomes exempt from mandatory detention under § 1226(c) if, after the alien is released from criminal custody, the Department of Homeland Security does not take him into immigration custody immediately. To the discuss the case, we have Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director & General Counsel, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues. All opinions are those of the speaker.

On October 10, 2018, the Supreme Court heard argument in Nielsen v. Preap, a case involving the exemption of a criminal alien from mandatory detention without bond due to a delay in arrest after release from criminal custody. As codified, § 1226(c) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (“INA”) provides for the mandatory detention of criminal aliens “when [they are] released” from criminal custody, and for the holding of these aliens without bond. The three plaintiffs in this case are lawful permanent residents who have committed crimes that could lead to their removal from the United States but after serving their criminal sentence were released and returned to their families and communities in the United States; however, years later, each was arrested by immigration authorities and detained without bond hearings under § 1226(c). The plaintiffs filed a class action petition for habeas relief in district court arguing that since they were not detained “when...released” from criminal custody, they are not subject to mandatory detention under § 1226(c). The district court granted their motion for class certification, issued a preliminary injunction requiring the government to provide all class members with bond hearings under § 1226(a), and concluded that under § 1226(c) aliens can be held without bound only if taken into immigration custody immediately upon release from criminal custody, not if there is a lengthy gap after their release. The government appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the statute “does not suggest that immigration officials lose authority if they delay.” The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s class certification order and preliminary injunction, and held that the mandatory detention provision of § 1226(c) applies only to those criminal aliens detained promptly after their release from criminal custody, not to those detained long after. The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether a criminal alien becomes exempt from mandatory detention under § 1226(c) if, after the alien is released from criminal custody, the Department of Homeland Security does not take him into immigration custody immediately. To the discuss the case, we have Kent Scheidegger, Legal Director & General Counsel, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues. All opinions are those of the speaker.

From the Naturalization Act of 1790 to the Chinese Exclusion Act to various incarnations of the Immigration Act, the United States has throughout its history imposed limits on the settlement of non-native individuals or non-citizens into the country. Since the time our nation was brand new, groups including slaves, Native Americans, Asians, and women, and up to today’s “Dreamers,” have alternately been barred from achieving U.S. citizenship. In the “land of the free,” has history shown us that immigration controls can be interpreted as a form of oppression, especially when it comes to naturalization? Joining Curiosity Unplugged today is Nicole Legate, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Illinois Tech’s Lewis College of Human Sciences, and Associate Professor of Law Carolyn Shapiro, who is on the faculty of Illinois Tech’s Chicago-Kent College of Law.

https://onthegroundshow.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2.OTG-AUG11-2017-REBROADCAST-SMALL.EDIT_.mp3 This hour is a rebroadcast of the major address, "The Rise of Trump," given by author and activist Chris Hedges in Vancouver, Canada in March 2017. "The Trump orders are written not to make America great again but to make America White. They are an updated version of the Nazi's Nuremberg Laws, the Jim Crow laws, the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Naturalization Act of 1870."--Chris Hedges

In the first months of the new administration, multiple questions have arisen about President Donald Trump’s approach to executive power. Join us for a discussion that will focus on the White House’s policy on immigration. We will discuss the law and policy of the executive order suspending immigration from seven majority Muslim nations under the Immigration and Naturalization Act and the US Constitution. Does the president have the authority to build a wall along the US-Mexico border and tax Mexican imports or currency transfers to pay for it? What can the president do in the absence of legislative action and when and where does the judiciary step in? Has President Trump gone too far or simply not framed the orders correctly? Daniel Farber, Peter Schuck, and John Yoo, three of the nation’s leading legal scholars, respond to these questions and more, illuminating the limits of the executive power. As part of our "Engage" series, this event features a post-discussion Q&A, when you will have the chance to participate directly with the speaker and gain incredible insights that you won't get anywhere else. SPEAKERS Daniel Farber Sho Sato Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley School of Law Peter Schuck Visiting Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley School of Law John Yoo Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley School of Law MODERATOR: Jeffrey L. Bleich CEO, Dentons Diplomatic Services and Chair, Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board For more information about this event please visit: http://www.worldaffairs.org/event-calendar/event/1700

On its 50th anniversary, we look at the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, which has changed the face of America. A nation dominated by white people from Europe has become a real ethnic melting pot — with lasting consequences — social, economic and political.

For reasons that are both complicated and simplistic, immigration has become the issues of our time.  Fifty years ago the passage of the Immigration and Naturalization Act put in place the system we have today.  That system has helped make us a nation of of immigrants and set the stage for the diverse Asian/American population in the US today.Erika Lee takes us through the history of that population in The Making of Asian America: A HistoryMy conversation with Erika Lee: 

Matthew Jacobson, Yale University“Immigration and Conceptions of ‘Fit’ Citizenship, 1790-1924″The Graduate Center, CUNYApril 14, 2008In this talk to New York City schoolteachers, historian Matthew Jacobson challenges conventional notions about America’s immigrant past. First, Jacobson discusses immigration from Europe to the United States within the larger context of global migration set off by the rise of industrial capitalism. Jacobson then examines the cultural and political responses of native-born Americans to new immigrants, and the long-lasting effects of the 1790 Naturalization Act. Finally, he discusses the strategies used by immigrants to survive in new surroundings while also preserving their ethnic identities.

Although little discussed by major political figures, there is an acidic undertow in the eternal sea of politics. This subterranean issue is immigration, especially from Mexico, and the Latin South. Such voices suffuse the airwaves and the blogosphere, and can reach a fever pitch. At their core is a profound fear, of a dark, brown flood, washing away all that went before of America. As long as there has been a United States (and, in fact, a good while longer), such a fear has found expression in the American psyche. The first Congress rushed to pass a Naturalization Act that limited citizenship to white people. Law books are thick with precedents deciding who is (or isn't), white, and by such a judgment, millions of people were turned away from the U.S. because they hailed from India, China, Syria, Palestine, or even Turkey. Many such cases shifted like tectonic plates, using various definitions of whiteness, to accept, or reject, a given applicant. The point is, people that were determined nonwhite one year, could be found white a few years later, either by the shift of a vote, or the change of a judge. And, despite the Sturm und Drang, despite the hyperventilation on the net, today's browns are tomorrow's whites, for how could it be otherwise when millions of Latin Americans hail from Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the Iberian Peninsula of Southern Europe. Of course, there are millions of Latin Americans who are descendants of African and Native American tribes. In the early 20th century, Italian, Jewish and similar immigrants were derided as threatening, foreign sources of a kind of contagion. Their languages and customs stirred up fear and profound xenophobia among American nativists. Indeed, as the movie "Gangs of New York" revealed, U.S. born Irish fought tooth and nail against immigrant Irish, proof, if an is needed, of the illusions of nationality. That fear that throbs beneath the radar of race and politics is long standing and cyclical. Like that of yore, this too will pass. (c) '08 maj