Posted by 
By Victor C. Romero
Throughout American historical past, the govt has used U.S. citizenship and immigration legislation to guard privileged teams from much less privileged ones, utilizing citizenship as a “legitimate” proxy for differently invidious, and sometimes unconstitutional, discrimination at the foundation of race. whereas racial discrimination is never legally applicable this day, profiling at the foundation of citizenship continues to be principally unchecked, and has in truth arguably elevated within the wake of the September eleven terror assaults at the usa. during this considerate exam of the intersection among American immigration and constitutional legislations, Victor C. Romero attracts our consciousness to a “constitutional immigration legislation paradox” that reserves sure rights for U.S. electorate merely, whereas at the same time purporting to regard everybody relatively below constitutional legislation despite citizenship.
As a naturalized Filipino American, Romero brings an outsider's viewpoint to Alienated, forcing us to examine constitutional immigration legislations from the vantage element of individuals whose citizenship prestige is murky (either legally or from the perspective of alternative voters and lawmakers), together with foreign-born adoptees, undocumented immigrants, travelers, international scholars, and same-gender bi-national companions. Romero endorses an equality-based analyzing of the structure and advocates a brand new theoretical and useful technique that protects the person rights of non-citizens with no sacrificing their personhood.
Read or Download Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America PDF
Best civil rights books
Civil Rights in the White Literary Imagination: Innocence by Association
Submit yr notice: First released January 1st 2012
-------------------------
The assertion, "The Civil Rights circulation replaced America," notwithstanding actual, has develop into anything of a cliché. Civil rights within the White Literary mind's eye seeks to figure out how, precisely, the Civil Rights stream replaced the literary chances of 4 iconic American writers: Robert Penn Warren, Norman Mailer, Eudora Welty, and William Styron. every one of those writers released major works ahead of the Brown v. Board of schooling case in 1954 and the Montgomery Bus Boycott that started in December of the next year,
making it attainable to track their evolution in response to those occasions. The paintings those writers crafted in line with the upheaval of the day, from Warren's Who Speaks for the Negro? , to Mailer's "The White Negro" to Welty's "Where Is the Voice Coming From? " to Styron's Confessions of Nat Turner, exhibit a lot approximately their very own feeling within the second whilst they give a contribution to the nationwide dialog that founded on race and democracy.
By reading those works heavily, grey posits the argument that those writers considerably formed discourse on civil rights because the circulation was once taking place yet did so in methods that--intentionally or not--often relied upon a proposal of the relative innocence of the South in regards to racial affairs, and on a build of African americans as politically and/or culturally na*ve. As those writers grappled with race and the parable of southern the Aristocracy, their paintings built in ways in which have been at the same time sympathetic of, and condescending to, black highbrow inspiration taking place while.
Governments, Citizens, and Genocide: A Comparative and Interdisciplinary
Governments, voters, and GenocideA Comparative and Interdisciplinary ApproachAlex AlvarezA finished research demonstrating how entire societies come to aid the perform of genocide. "Alex Alvarez has produced an really accomplished and valuable research of recent genocide.
Religious Liberty in Western and Islamic Law: Toward a World Legal Tradition
In spiritual Liberty in Western and Islamic legislation: towards an international criminal culture, Kristine Kalanges argues that adjustments among Western and Islamic criminal formulations of non secular freedom are attributable, in sizeable half, to adaptations of their respective non secular and highbrow histories.
Extra info for Alienated : immigrant rights, the constitution, and equality in America
Sample text
We prefer the familiar. S. citizens and noncitizens (a narrower circle). Similarly, airport security burdens should be visited upon all airline passengers (a larger circle of travelers) rather than only upon Muslims and Arabs (a smaller racial and religious circle). But how do we convince the 57 percent of Americans45 who were in favor of profiling following the 9/11 attacks and the many more who are Immigrants and the War on Terrorism after 9/11 | 35 disinclined to eliminate the Presidential Eligibility Clause’s birthright-naturalized citizen distinction that drawing large circles of loyalty makes sense?
The answer is that these citizenship and race distinctions are irrational proxies for loyalty. I contend that, even within the contexts of the “disloyal terrorist” and the “loyal president,” relying on race and citizenship as proxies for loyalty are so inaccurate that they are unnecessarily antagonistic to those in the racial and citizenship out-group. My suspicion is that those who fancy themselves loyal believe that there is a group of readily identifiable “disloyalists” whose racial and citizenship characteristics are different from theirs.
Should they all be deported; detained and screened for possible deportation; or interrogated about their links to terrorism? In what ways may our immigration laws requiring the exclusion or removal of noncitizens assist in the war on terrorism? Even if technological advances permitted us to infallibly determine whether a noncitizen was a terrorist or not, would immigration law be used to either exclude that individual at the border or remove her from the country? ” On the one hand, ridding the nation of a dangerous individual prevents her from directly threatening the country; on the other, deporting the terrorist means she is still at large, allowing her to strike another day either directly (by entering without authorization across the border) or indirectly (by abetting a plan to be carried out by associates).