 Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 |
|
Also known as the McCarran–Walter Act, this act of Congress retained the national origins quotas for controlling immigration, but granted immigration quotas to all countries and removed racial restrictions for naturalization.
|
| In the Matter of Hannah and Biddy and their children on Petition for Habeas Corpus (1856) |
|
In the decision in this case, a California judge ruled that Biddy Mason and her three children, as well as a woman named Hannah and her nine children and grandchildren, were "free forever" after their enslaver brought them into the free state of California to reside.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Alice McKay for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for the Body of Mary McKay (1891) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Alice McKay shows legal challenges related to child custody in the nineteenth century. In this case, a mother petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus after placing one of her children with a charitable organization to receive medical care and custody of the child was eventually given to a married couple. Before a court order was made in the case, the mother abducted the child from the married couple's home. Custody of the child was awarded by the court to the married couple.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Yu Gum and Yu Hung for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1886) |
|
The habeas corpus petitions of Yu Gum and Yu Hung show legal challenges related to carceral confinement and immigration in the nineteenth century. In this case, two sisters were detained in Seattle for being in the U.S. unlawfully. When they were set to be deported to British Columbia, the girls petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. The outcome of their case is unknown.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus for the Person of Nan Oy (1888) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Nan Oy shows legal challenges related to carceral confinement and immigration in the nineteenth century. In this case, Nan Oy was arrested crossing the U.S. border to be with her husband, a U.S. citizen. She was ultimately deported.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of Ham Hung Wah by Tom Sing for Writ of Habeas Corpus (1911) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Ham Hung Wah shows legal challenges related to immigration in the early twentieth century. In this case, the twelve-year-old native-born son of Chinese immigrant parents was arrested and detained as "an alien Chinese person seeking unlawfully to land in the United States" after returning to America from China where he had been visiting his grandparents. To support his son's petition, Ham Hung Wah's father also submitted an affidavit from prominent white members of society testifying to the family's trustworthiness, membership in the Presbyterian Church, and adoption of the "habits of western civilization." The petition was eventually dismissed at the request of Wah's attorney. His fate is unknown.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of Juan Rey Abeita for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1892) |
|
In this case, Juan Rey Abeita petitioned on behalf of his three sons against the superintendent of the Government Indian School in Albuquerque, who refused to allow his sons to return home. The writ was granted, but Abeita later withdrew the petition. Records in the Office of Indian Affairs indicate that the agency pressured the superintendent into releasing the children to avoid an unfavorable legal ruling.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of Kichitaro Kubota and Ise Kubota for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1920) |
|
In this habeas case, a Japanese immigrant and his new wife were denied entry to the United States after visiting Japan. Kichitaro Kubota presented evidence of his employment and property-ownership to the court and condemned the prejudice that led to their exclusion. The judge found that Kubota and his wife were entitled to be admitted into the U.S. and ordered them released from detention.
|
| John Heo v. Robert H. Milroy (1880) |
|
In this habeas suit, John Heo was arrested by an Indian agent after he refused to reside on the reservation with his wife and children. Heo argued that he had severed his tribal relations, as had his parents, and that they never lived on a reservation or accepted government annuities. Despite "constantly living with the whites engaged in the pursuits of civilized life" and having "at no time lived with any tribe of Indians" or "acknowledged himself a member of any Indian tribe," the judge ruled in favor of the Indian agent, and Heo remained in custody.
|
| Jones Act (1920) |
|
The Jones Act established that all interstate shipping must be conducted on ships that are owned and operated by United States shipping. This act claims to protect national security, but it also makes shipping to U.S. territories and Hawaii more expensive than international shipping.
|
 Keeping Account (1885) |
|
This political cartoon, published in the wake of the Rock Springs Massacre that targeted Chinese laborers, depicted the practice of "indemnity," or compensation between nations in the wake of racial violence. The cartoon depicted Uncle Sam and the Emperor of China debating how and whether China would be compensated for the racial violence in Wyoming Territory.
|
| Korematsu v. United States (1944) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that war-time exclusion against Japanese-Americans was valid.
|
| Korematsu v. United States (1984) |
|
In this case, Korematsu challenged his 1942 conviction by filing a writ of coram nobis, which asserted that his original conviction was so flawed as to represent a grave injustice and should be reversed. The judge granted the writ, thereby voiding Korematsu's conviction.
|
| Letter from Commissioner of Indian Affairs to Superintendent, Round Valley, California (1902) |
|
This letter from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to the Superintendent of the Round Valley Reservation in California reveals the connections between appearance and progress towards civilization in the eyes of federal Indian policymakers during the Progressive Era. This federal document is an example of policies restricting Native American identity for the purpose of furthering assimilation. In it, racialized presumptions about civilization are tied to hair, Native practices of face painting, and clothing. The agent is encouraged to get his wards to wear their hair short, as it will "hasten their progress towards civilization." Hair is especially seen as an agent of regression for former boarding school students, who return to the reservation, let their hair grow long, and subsequently "adopts all the old habits and customs which his education in our industrial schools had tried to eradicate." Dancing and feasts are prohibited because of their effects on morality. The Commissioner suggests withholding employment and supplies from Native Americans who do not comply with these orders.
|
| Louisiana Purchase Treaty (1803) |
|
The Louisiana Purchase Treaty reflected United States ambitions toward empire, while ignoring critical issues regarding the incorporation of Native nations.
|
| McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission (1973) |
|
In McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that the state did not have the right to tax Native Americans living and earning income on tribal land.
|
| Memorial of Chinese laborers resident at Rock Springs, Wyoming Territory (1885) |
|
Over five hundred Chinese survivors of the 1885 racial violence in Rock Springs petitioned Huang Sih Chuen, the Chinese consul at New York, providing testimony of the white-led massacre and detailing the circumstances through which they lost property. Survivors demanded bodily protection and property compensation, while invoking recent treaty stipulations between the U.S. and China
|
| Mendez v. Westminster (1947) |
|
Menedez v. Westminster found educational segregation toward Latino students unconstitutional.
|
| Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones (1973) |
|
In Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, the Supreme Court ruled that the state could tax tribal business that is off-reservation, but not business that took place on the reservation.
|
| Miranda v. Arizona (1966) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that criminal suspects must be advised of their constitutional rights before being interrogated. Now known as Miranda Rights, a Miranda Warning is given to suspects in police custody advising them informing them of their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination and their Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
|
| Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo (2025) |
|
The Supreme Court's decision in this case allows federal agents to continuing using factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, spoken language or accent, presence at a specific location, and type of employment in conducting stops and making arrests.
|
| Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe (1978) |
|
In Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, the court ruled that Native American tribes had no jurisdiction over non-Indians. The ruling was later overturned by the Indian Civil Rights Act and the ruling in Duro v. Reina that stated tribes had criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians. The case of Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians also held that tribes had jurisdiction over non-Indians.
|
| Opinion of Judge Hays on Slavery in California (1856) |
|
In the decision in this case, a California judge ruled that Biddy Mason and her three children, as well as a woman named Hannah and her nine children and grandchildren, were "free forever" after their enslaver brought them into the free state of California to reside. The judge's opinion was published in the official newspaper of the American Anti-Slavery Society.
|
| Ozawa v. United States (1922) |
|
The Supreme Court found in Ozawa v. United States that Japanese immigrants were not eligible for naturalization, based on a contested category of whiteness. The case considered the meaning of "free white persons" from the 1906 Naturalization Act and whether factors like assimilability should be considered. While the court determined in Ozawa that the words "white person" were meant to indicate a person of the "caucasian race," the decision in U.S. v. Thind just months later stated that the word "caucasian" was meant to refer to the "common understanding" of race and not a scientific one.
|
| Peonage Act of 1867 |
|
Following the passage of the 13th Amendment, this act officially abolished peonage, or debt slavery, in the United States. It specifically targeted New Mexico Territory, where this form of involuntary servitude was historically practiced. This act was later codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1994.
|