My Blog

Blog Post #1

Daniel Kanstroom writes that the United States implements two distinct types of deportation laws, “extended border control” and “post-entry social control.” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 5) “Extended border control”, typically deals with the control of territory, legal definitions of citizens and noncitizens and other rules that correspond to deportation. (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 5). Post-entry social control, Kanstroom claims, refers to practices by the United States government that go behind the reach of “extended border control” in an attempt to shape, govern and restrict certain populations of people. Kanstroom finds it useful to distinguish between the two types of deportation laws. If reform of the United States deportation laws is the ultimate goal, then a distinction is not necessary and may actually be a hindrance. One might focus on the atrocities of just the so called “post-entry social control” laws and lose sight of other less blatant discriminatory practices of “extended border control.” Whether it be socially or economically, all deportation laws are ultimately made to control a population.

The Alien Friends Act as well as the Alien Enemies Act were both examples of “post-entry social control.” The Alien Friends Act, while not as controversial as the Alien Enemies Act, allowed the arrest and movement of citizens of a particular country. This could only be done after that nation had officially declared war on the United States or there was an imminent threat of invasion. After watching France defeat other countries (pg 55) the paranoia of French spies intermingled in the population began to spread. The Federalists wanted the President to have executive power to deport anyone deemed for any reason, a threat to the security of the newly formed nation (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 56.)

An example of “extended border control,” is “Expedited removal” which was started in 1996, and targets noncitizens arriving at ports. Informal interviews, allow border agents to determine if a person is allowed to be admitted into the United States. The officer is allowed to forbid entry if a person does not have proper identification. This idea of “expedited removal” is currently practiced on noncitizens who have been captured within 100 miles of the US border and coastal areas. This allows the removal of noncitizens in the same way as if they were just arriving into the country and without any official legal proceedings (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 14).

The Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795 and 1798 had aspects of “extended border control” as well as “post-entry social control.” These acts created waiting periods for naturalization of citizens. The Naturalization act of 1790 may have been seen more as “extended border control” as it only required a two year waiting period for naturalization. The Naturalization act of 1798 is more an instrument of “post-entry social control.” In order to prevent foreign-born potential republicans from voting, the act increased the waiting period to fourteen years (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 54).

It is difficult to separate deportation laws between “extended border control and “post-entry social control” because all of the laws contain a social aspect to them. Laws are created to protect and benefit those that are in power. When that protection or those benefits are threatened then laws are adjusted accordingly. “Extended border control” and “post-entry social control” can be both referred to as border control. Border control is just population control which could be further simplified as laws. Laws control populations, and deportation laws are no different.

Blog Post #2

Deportation laws in Chapter 4 of Daniel Kanstroom’s book, Deportation Nation, while quite similar to those in Chapter 3, were expanded upon and further refined. Similar themes of morality, social control and a desire to end crime permeate both chapters. Chapter 4 expands on the laws written about in chapter 3 with themes of nationalism.

There are parallel deportation developments in chapter 3 and chapter 4 of Kanstroom’s book. The designers of “The Page Act of 1875” hoped to prevent Chinese prostitutes from entering the country. The creators of the act were concerned with the perceived attack on social norms, disease and lewdness that the Chinese prostitutes would bring. Using arguments of morality, limiting crime and maintaining the social status quo the act passed. The act severely reduced the amount of would be Chinese immigrants who were women (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 103).

In Chapter 4, a State Senator from California Edwin E. Grant’s idea of “eliminating at all costs” the “Scum from the Melting Pot” was an argument towards reducing supposed crimes committed by immigrants (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 134). Grant goes on to say that as soon as they “sail past the Statue of Liberty” they begin committing crimes (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 134). In the 1920s the concept of “crime involving moral turpitude” shaped deportation laws (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation,134). When immigrants broke laws, even such minor ones as “misdemeanor shoplifting,” they could be deported for committing crimes involving “moral turpitude.” These ideas are similar to “The Page Act of 1875” in that they both used crime prevention and the moral ideals of those in power, to shape deportation laws and control populations.

In chapter 3 the case of Fong Yue Ting v. United States in 1893 challenged the “Geary Act of 1892.” Justice Gray heard Fong Yue Ting’s case and decided “the right of a nation to expel or deport foreigners … rests upon the same grounds and is as absolute and unqualified as the right to prohibit and prevent their entrance into the country” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 118). The case effectively set precedent that “proof of post-entry facts” were “linked to pre-entry conditions” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 125).

Both the cases of Fong Yue Ting and John Turner tied deportation to entering the country “because one could be deported” for “cause existing prior to… landing.” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 125). In chapter 4 Kanstroom argues that the deportation of John Turner further blurred the “line between exclusion and deportation.” John Turner was a self-proclaimed anarchist. He was ultimately deported and it was justified. The reasoning was that based on Turner’s beliefs, he should not have entered the country to begin with, which put him in violation of the law and gave reason for deportation.

The developments in Chapter 4 expanded and refined modern deportation law with the development America’s nationalism and “Americanism” and ideas of a national identity fostered by “rigid ideological conformity” took shape (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 146). Ideas of After the “Bisbee Deporation” Sheriff Wheeler likened Americans doing their job in the “mines of Arizona,” to Americans fighting in “trenches in France” during the first world war (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 144).

During World War I America came together to fight a world war and an anti-German sentiment developed. The Federal Government passed a law that “required all German males over the age of fourteen to register.” This registration program led to the documentation of 480,000 people (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 140-141). Immigrant “slackers” as they were called, were those said to be enjoying the “peaceful privileges” of the United States without having to fight in the war. In addition, after the Russian Revolution, attention turned to the Communists (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 146). Political dissonants such as Jon Turner and Emma Goldman were deported for their political leanings. (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 137,151).

Ideas of social control are rampant through both chapters 3 and 4. Morality and a perceived influx of crime are used as excuses for deportations laws throughout both chapters. Chapter 4 further refines these laws of morality by adding themes of “Americanism” and protecting the nation’s identity, or at least the identity of those that are in power.

Blog Post #3

Daniel Kanstroom in his book Deportation Nation argues that the “U.S deportation system has caused considerable harm and done little demonstrable good” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 243). Throughout history the evolution of deportation law in the United States has been shaped by blatant paranoia in regards to crime, war, and loss of so-called “Americanism.” From the “Page Act of 1875” to the “Anti-Drug Abuse Act” in 1988 American deportation lawmakers have been obsessed with ridding this nation of immigrant criminals. The “Alien Friends Act” at the inception of the United States was created in order to maintain national security. Recent laws such as the "Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act" have become “more efficient, less discretionary, and much more rigid” and maintaining national identity and “Americanism” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 10). Early “Americanism” in the “Bisbee Deportation” gave way to “Americanism” in the form of ridding the nation of Mexican immigrants or the so called “wetback.” Deportation lawmakers “poorly planned and irrationally administered” laws which focused on criminal immigrants, foreign enemies in times of war, and maintaining national identity and “Americanism” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 243).

Crime was often used as an excuse to control the population, and weed out problem or potential problem immigrants. Kanstroom argues that the “post-entry social control deportation system was a perfect vehicle for politicians to demonstrate toughness on crime at virtually no political cost” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 228).

The threat, even if only imagined, of immigrant criminals running amongst innocent Americans seems to have shaped much of American immigration law throughout history. “The Page Act of 1875” took aim at the Chinese population, especially Chinese women prostitutes. The creators of the act cited concerns with the attack on social norms, the spread of disease and downright lewdness that the prostitutes brought to America. The act passed and limited greatly the amount of potential Chinese Immigrants who were women (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 93).

“Moral Turpitude” which remained a mainstay throughout American deportation law throughout the 20^th century was often used to deport criminal offenders. This language in deportation law allowed crimes as miniscule as misdemeanor shoplifting to be deportable offenses (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 134). The idea of “Moral Turpitude” really only took into account the morals of those who were in power and led to some interesting interpretations of the law.

In 1988 the “Anti-Drug Abuse Act” was passed and defined an “aggravated felony” category which included a list of crimes such as” murder, drug trafficking, and illicit trafficking in firearms.” If a noncitizen was convicted of an “aggravated felony” would be “subject to deportation, taken into custody by the attorney general upon completion of his or her jail term, and held without bond” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 227). This was a way to give more power to deport criminal offenders.

The perceived threat of war or war itself have shaped deportation law in America since the country was founded. War has all too often been an excuse to rid America of its immigrant “enemies.” The “Alien Friends Act” and the “Alien Enemies Act” were some of the first laws to limit the rights of immigrants and make their deportation legal in times of war. The “Alien Friends Act” allowed the arrest and movement of citizens if their home country had officially declared war on the United States or if there was a imminent threat of invasion. The “Alien Enemies Act” which was more strict allowed the deportation of anyone who may be a threat to the United States (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 56).

During World War I an anti-German sentiment developed during the United States. The United States government developed and federal program to register and track all German males over the age of 14. Almost a half million German males residing in the United States were documented as a part of this program (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation,140-141).

Deep rooted racial prejudice towards the Japanese led to the formation of internment camps during World War II for Japanese immigrants as well as some American citizens of Japanese descent. David Cole wrote that “the close interrelationship between anti-Asian racism and anti-immigrant sentiment made the transition from ‘enemy alien’ to ‘enemy race’ a disturbingly smooth one” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 207). The United States greatly overreacted in a time of war.

In 1996 the Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) as well as the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act both passed in direct response to the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995. IIRIRA expanded criminal offenses that were grounds for automatic deportation. These laws “took away Judicial review, made detention mandatory during deportation proceedings as well as when applying for asylum or humanitarian protection.” (https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/04/25/us-20-years-immigrant-abuses)

Ideas of Americanism and Nationalism permeate throughout immigration law in the United States and maintaining national identity and “Americanism” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 146). Lawmakers attempted to make laws to protect the identity of the United States. Deportation law made it clear that political differences would not be tolerated. After the Russian revolution in 1917 Communists were the focus of deportation law. John Turner, who considered himself to be an Anarchist was deported simply for his political beliefs (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 137). Emma Goldman was deported after her husband died for her political ideas (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 151).

During the “Bisbee Deportation” where immigrants were rounded up and taken away not by the government, but by private citizens. Sheriff Wheeler praised those that did the deporting and likened their actions to soldier fighting in World War I (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation,146). In essence the idea of people maintaining "Americanism" or Americans doing their patriotic duty was an essential part of protecting the nation.

Martin Dies ran a house committee that targeted groups of people in the United States “which are directed, controlled, or subsidized by foreign governments or agencies which seek to change the policies and form of the government of the United States in accordance with the wishes of such foreign governments.” Kanstroom argued that Martin Dies targeted “foreign born” alien communists and fascists to maintain the security of the nation (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 190).

Mexican immigrants greatly challenged ideas of "Americanism". After the depression Mexican laborers began to come into the United States in great numbers (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 219). The United States in an agreement with Mexico in 1942 created the “Bracero Program” for “Temporary Migration of Mexican Agricultural Workers to the United States” The “Bracero Program” brought 4.5 million Mexican workers into the United States (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 219). During this same time many Mexicans crossed the border illegally. The decade after World War II is referred to as “the decade of the wetback” because, the number of Mexicans crossing the border illegally, increased by 6000 percent. The Presidential Commission on Migratory Labor estimated that two out of every five migratory farm worker were “wetbacks” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 221). The commission reported that “When the work is done, neither the farmer nor the community wants the wetback around” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 223). Laws were created to limit the amount of Mexican immigrants in order to protect the American way of life.

In 1953 President Truman appointed a commission to analyze the immigration policies of the United States. Their report, “Whom Shall We Welcome,” stated that “flout fundamental American traditions and ideals, [and] display a lack of faith in America’s future.” The report went on to say that it believed that laws that “fail to reflect the American spirit must sooner or later disappear from the statute books” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 224).

Crime, threats or perceived threats of war, and an attempt to maintain America’s identity have shaped deportation law throughout the history of the United States. Kanstroom writes that “the history of deportation law shows us how integral the removal impulse has been to our nation of immigrants” (Kanstroom, Deportation Nation, 246). Trigger-happy lawmakers with deportation on their mind crafted laws to remove immigrants in order to create a world that suited them and those that are in power while leaving the rights and concerns of immigrants by the way side.