Unsuitable Suitors: Anti-Miscegenation Laws, Naturalization Laws, and the Construction of Asian Identities

Abstract

In this article, I use state‐level anti‐miscegenation legislation to examine how Asian ethnic groups became categorized within the American racial system in the period between the Civil War and the civil rights movement of the 1960s. I show how the labels used to describe Asian ethnic groups at the state level reflected and were constrained by national‐level debates regarding the groups eligible for U.S. citizenship. My main point is that Asian ethnic groups originally were viewed as legally distinct—racially and ethnically, and that members of these groups recognized and used these distinctions to seek social rights and privileges. The construction of “Asian” as a social category resulted primarily from congressional legislation and judicial rulings that linked immigration with naturalization regulations. Anti‐miscegenation laws further contributed to the social exclusion of those of Asian ancestry by grouping together U.S.‐born and foreign‐born Asians.

Legally Queer: The Construction of Sexuality in LGBQ Asylum Claims

“…As Haney Lopez (2006) shows, courts, in the process of determining who was eligible for citizenship, concomitantly decided what counted as "white" and "not white" by drawing on a combination of factors, including skin color, ancestry, scientific opinion, and common knowledge. Pascoe (2009) similarly demonstrates how anti-miscegenation laws worked to define, produce, and reproduce racial categories (also see Sohoni 2007). The law not only codified racial categories, it also powerfully shaped their content, what they mean, and what privileges accrue to them.…”

One Hundred and Fifty Years of “The Chinese Question”: An Intergroup Relations Perspective on Immigration and Globalization

“…Segregation and isolation has a particularly strong presence in the history of Chinese Americans in the United States, because of laws prescribing where Chinese Americans could live in the 19th century, and later relating to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and its impact on Chinese American communities (Lee, 2007). Even after the end of the Chinese Exclusion Act and the more open immigration policies developed in the in 1960s, Chinese Americans have still experienced exclusion from European American society in housing (Turner & Ross, 2003), job discrimination (Duleep & Sanders, 1992), and socially, through being prohibited from pursuing romantic relationships with European Americans (Sohoni, 2007).…”

“…Immigrants of color—perhaps particularly Chinese Americans, but also Mexican Americans or immigrants of color from other parts of the world—were not afforded similar opportunities to “blend in.” Until well into the second half of the 20th century, antimiscegenation laws were prevalent (Sohoni, 2007), as were laws restricting access to education and property (Lee, 2007). Even today, during a difficult recession, anti‐immigrant sentiment has risen to a fevered pitch—but that anti‐immigrant sentiment is almost exclusively directed at immigrants of color (Laws 2010, Chapter 113 in Arizona and similar laws across many states in the United States).…”

Homogamy and Intermarriage of Japanese and Japanese Americans With Whites Surrounding World War II

“…Until the mid-20th century, the 1924 Asian Exclusion Act barred all Asians from gaining citizenship (U.S. Department of State, 2009). Although secondgeneration children were citizens and could own land, they were prohibited from marrying Whites (Sohoni, 2007).…”

“…Department of State, 2009). Although second‐generation children were citizens and could own land, they were prohibited from marrying Whites (Sohoni, 2007).…”