Search

The United States has an increasing number of people from around the world, which has led to a rise in mixed-citizenship romantic relationships. Yet, these relationships and family structures remain significantly understudied. Mixed-citizenship romantic relationships, referring to individuals in a romantic relationship who hold or previously held different citizenships, are faced with various unique experiences in comparison to same-citizenship romantic relationships (e.g. immigration rhetoric, filing of paperwork, and financial obligations). Grounded in relational dialectics theory, this study examined how discourses operate and inform the meaning of mixed-citizenship romantic relationships, as well as the ways discourses compete. Through 15 semi-structured interviews, results reveal two discourses: A Discourse of Love is the Driving Force and A Discourse of Material Uncertainty. Moreover, discourses competed for dominance and, at times, intersected to create new meanings. Findings illuminate implications of talk for members of mixed-citizenship relationships, and offer suggestions for practitioners in communicating about these consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to assess relationships between previous stroke diagnosis and demographic or disability status variables, stratified by U.S. citizenship status. The 2019 and 2021 National Health Interview Survey data were analyzed for both descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. Age, sex, income level, race/ethnicity, health insurance status, and indicators of disability common after stroke were predictor variables of interest. For each disability predictor variable, higher odds of having stroke were seen regardless of citizenship status, except for the 'difficulty remembering' variable. For U.S. citizens, increasing age corresponded with higher odds of stroke diagnosis. For noncitizens, odds ratios decreased from 40.3 (95% CI 38.88–41.82) for the 40–65 age group to 29.6 (95% CI 28.38–30.77) in the 80 + group, when compared with the 18–39 age reference group. Female noncitizens had higher odds of stroke, while male citizens had higher odds. Non-Hispanic Black citizens had higher odds of stroke, while the other racial/ethnic groups had higher odds for noncitizens. The results indicated the existence of several socio-demographic disparities in stroke. Notably, noncitizens experienced stroke at a younger age and reported more severe disability outcomes after stroke diagnosis than citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the Supreme Court case Schneiderman v. United States (1943), which addressed the issue of whether the U.S. government could strip a Soviet-born U.S. citizen of his citizenship due to his membership in the Communist Party. It explores the involvement of Wendell Willkie, a prominent lawyer and former Republican presidential candidate, who defended William Schneiderman, emphasizing the case's complex intersection with wartime politics and civil liberties.

We evaluate the performance of a widely used technique for imputing the legal immigration status of U.S. immigrants in survey data—the logical imputation method. We validate this technique by implementing it in a nationally representative survey of U.S. farmworkers that includes a well-regarded measure of legal status. When using this measure as a benchmark, the imputation algorithm correctly identifies the legal status of 78% of farmworkers. Of all the variables included in the algorithm, we find that Medicaid participation poses the greatest challenge for accuracy. Using the American Community Survey, we show that increased Medicaid enrollments stemming from the implementation of the Affordable Care Act in 2014 led to sizable changes in the share of immigrants imputed as legal over time and across space. We explore the implications of these changes for two previous studies and conclude that including Medicaid criteria in the imputation algorithm can significantly impact research findings. We also provide tools to gauge the sensitivity of results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Puerto Rico is an uncomfortable reminder of the democratic deficits within the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens who live in a U.S. territory that is subject to the plenary authority of Congress, to which they cannot elect voting members. In 2022, under unified Democratic control for the first time in a decade, Congress considered the Puerto Rico Status Act, legislation that would finally decolonize Puerto Rico. The Status Act offered Puerto Rican voters three alternatives to the colonial status quo—statehood, independence, or sovereignty in free association—and committed Congress to implementing whichever alternative won majority support from Puerto Rican voters. The Status Act sought to define how any change in status would affect Puerto Ricans’ access to U.S. citizenship. The Status Act proposed that all Puerto Ricans would retain their U.S. citizenship if Puerto Rico became independent or entered free association but included special restrictions that would limit Puerto Ricans’ ability to pass on their U.S. citizenship to children born after a change in status. While this Note appreciates the Status Act’s efforts to decolonize Puerto Rico, it argues that the Status Act erred in proposing this specialized regime for citizenship claims. Instead, it contends that the existing derivative citizenship framework would better regulate citizenship for Puerto Rican U.S. citizens born after a change in status. Although the Status Act died in the Senate, it represents a new and influential formula for decolonizing Puerto Rico. Future proponents of status reform should draw on the existing derivative citizenship law because it offers clearer provisions that can better ensure a large number of Puerto Ricans may rely on U.S. citizenship—a benefit Puerto Ricans themselves clearly value—even after a change in status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on recent Supreme Court and eight Circuit rulings impacting immigration and visa issues. It highlights the Supreme Court's decision that a U.S. citizen does not have a constitutionally protected interest in a noncitizen spouse's visa application, emphasizing the doctrine of consular nonreviewability. It also covers the Court's ruling that initial notices lacking hearing details do not invalidate subsequent notices if they are properly issued.

Akhoy Kumar Mozumdar (1881-1953), New Thought proponent and teacher of Christian Yoga, was among the earliest Indians to get American citizenship and the first Indian immigrant filmmaker in the United States. Yet his name is referenced merely in passing in the histories of both the New Thought movement and early twentiethcentury yoga. Focusing on Mozumdar’s life and thought, this article argues that Mozumdar’s universalist teachings on the power of the human mind were embedded in discourses of racial and caste purity that were crucial to him gaining American citizenship and garnering acceptance as a spiritual teacher among White audiences. His life and work reveal that discourses of racial purity in the United States, evident in New Thought too, were implicated in discourses of caste and Aryan race theory transposed to American shores from overseas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Note highlights a troubling gap in access to federal habeas relief for persons detained in American Samoa, the only United States territory that does not confer birthright citizenship on persons born there. There is no law affirmatively establishing that persons detained in American Samoa are entitled to seek federal habeas relief, regardless of citizenship status. However, there is a theoretical pathway for U.S. citizens detained in American Samoa to petition for federal habeas relief using a common law exception to the "immediate custodian rule" that requires habeas petitioners to name their local warden as respondent. This rule usually creates an insurmountable barrier to federal habeas relief because there is no federal court in American Samoa and no federal court can assert personal jurisdiction over a prison warden in American Samoa. The exception is explicitly available only to U.S. citizens detained outside the territorial jurisdiction of any federal court. The Secretary of the Interior has plenary authority over American Samoa. Therefore, as indicated by the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii in Barlow v. Sunia, a U.S. citizen detained in American Samoa could name the Secretary as respondent and petition for federal habeas relief in the District of D.C. Because this exception does not extend to noncitizen U.S. nationals detained in American Samoa, and the "noncitizen national" designation exists only in American Samoa, this population is uniquely precluded from accessing federal habeas relief, a privilege the Supreme Court has extended to extraterritorial noncitizen detainees in notable cases like Rasul v. Bush and Boumediene v. Bush, among others. There are myriad solutions available to correct differentiated access based solely on citizenship status. The simplest option would be for the federal courts to expand the Padilla exception to include noncitizen nationals. Alternatively, Congress could establish a federal court in American Samoa or expand an existing federal court's jurisdiction to encompass claims arising out of the Territory. Unfortunately, there are also significant barriers to enacting those solutions. This is in large part because the federal government has unrestricted power over American Samoa, and the Territory's small population and remote location make amassing sufficient political power to compel change unlikely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mental health providers caring for refugees should be aware that obtaining citizenship is critical to stability and safety for their patients. In the United States (U.S.), obtaining citizenship requires applicants to pass an examination exhibiting working knowledge of English and foundational knowledge of U.S. civics. For refugees with mental health disorders that impair cognition, this may present insurmountable barriers. The United States Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS) offers form N-648 to request exemption from these requirements. However, the form can be difficult to complete in a manner acceptable to USCIS. In this paper, the authors present preliminary data on citizenship-related mental health evaluations and subsequent applications for 40 patients seen in a university-based refugee mental health clinic. We simplify the process into three phases, and present three cases highlighting specific complexities involved. Our experiences and recommendations may help other mental health providers prepare to advocate for their refugee patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering the critical methods of performance studies, critical race studies, and sensorial studies, this article analyses the creation of social identities through the rubric of touch – a tactile sensibility that provides a cultural foundation for the misperception of bodies as racialized subjects. Touch has been an under-researched and under-utilized methodology for understanding how race works. Specifically attending to the historical period of Jim Crow in the early twentieth century because of its deeply held investments in the politics of separateness, this article examines Paul Green's 1926 Pulitzer Prize–winning play In Abraham's Bosom as one of the rare dramas during this period that actually showed Black acts of touching back on the stage. Green challenges his audience to contend with an oppressive Jim Crow racial regime that forced African Americans to establish alternative modes of freedom outside of more traditional expressions of autonomy and citizenship. Reading Green's work in this way allows for a consideration of the differing strategies at play in the fight toward equality for Black Americans. Taking up tactility, in the context of the United States, as a cultural system used to mark bodies as raced and weaponized to uphold white supremacy, this essay approaches touch as a performative act that is meaningful, effective, and consequential, thereby grappling with the present ways that American society underestimates the social, political, and cultural power that touch wields in our understanding of social identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to demonstrate how mental health is tied to citizenship, and to help professionals understand mental health in the context of social rights and responsibilities, to move towards a right-based practice. Design/methodology/approach: The author will explore the concept of citizenship together with mental health service users', relatives' and professionals' organisations. Using a qualitative analysis of this exploration, this study will develop, implement and evaluate, using a randomised design, awareness interventions with mental health professionals. Findings: The author will use thematic analysis for qualitative data and multilevel mixed-effects linear models to evaluate the effect of the awareness interventions. Social implications: The results of the project will enable conversations between mental health professionals, relatives and service users that might help them understand mental health as part of citizenship. Originality/value: To the best of the author's knowledge, this will be the first controlled study of standardised citizenship-based awareness interventions for mental health professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary Second Amendment law, which originated with the famous Heller decision (2008) and reached a new peakwith Bruen (2022), relies on an implicit political theory. This article uncovers and critiques that theory. I argue that the Supreme Court's Second Amendment jurisprudence positions interpersonal seljidefense, and more generally individual response to crime, at the heart of the meaning of American citizenship. The paradigmatic citizen for whom state institutions should be designed is a sellidefender, because, per the Court's interpretive methodology, this is what the American people want. This line of cases thus attempts one of the most challenging feats of modern political philosophy: squaring popular sovereignty with natural rights, and particularly the right to use violence in selfidefense. Curiously. however, the philosopher who Arst and most injluentially established how self defense and popular sovereignty bear on each other, Thomas Hobbes, is absent from Second Amendment analyses. The article explains why this absence is unfortunate and then rectifies it. Ruling that selt-defense is a necessary component of the good state puts the Second Amendment in Hobbesian terrain. However. while Hellerian Second Amendment law might appear to vindicate Hobbes's protoliberal bases for justice, with the necessary adjustments for a constitutional democracy, Hobbes does very dilferent things with the same ingredients. Hobbes would recognize the conclusions that the Supreme Court reaches as exactly those that we ought to overcome. The Second Amendment's selfidefense is hierarchical and moralistic: it is a just infliction of violence and an individual right to designate fellow citizens as criminals. Hobbes's self-defense is egalitarian and materialistic: it is a matter of selppreservation. Hence, for Hobbes, se.lf-defense is neither a moral nor a social achievement. It will always have a place in public life, but that does not make the presence of self-defense a desirable one. Selldefense is base, as we are when we are left alone; we contract to no longer be le# alone. Rather than come naturally and be discarded if they don't, Hobbes thought that peace and sociability require work. The article.focuses onfour critiques of the Supreme Court's Second Amendment that Hobbes helps to flesh out. First, Hobbes conceptualized self-defense as directed toward safety, whereas the Supreme Court adopts the Lockean view, which links self-defense to autonomy and hence allows private appeals to morality to cut through political associations and assert themselves by.force. Second, Hobbes held an egalitarian understanding of political subjectivity, and ascribed corresponding representation and protection responsibilities to state institutions. The Heller-Bruen line of cases, in contrast, favors a patriarchal order of hierarchy and selfsumciency. Third, Hobbes viewed self-dejense as natural but unfortunate, a right that we have but that should not dictate our everyday lives. The phenomenon of mass shootings epitomizes the dangerous repercussions of a contrasting cultural script, according to which the ultimate American citizen is a self-defender. Fourth, Hobbes linked self-defense and popular sovereignty to cultivate a flourishing public life, but the Hellerian Court translates this relationship into constitutional fetishism. For the Second Amendment Supreme Court, self-defense serves not to bring about a social contract but to break one lip. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stress and depression are common mental health concerns among college students. Factors related to weight status and stigma are associated with poor mental health outcomes. We sought to describe the prevalence of weight dissatisfaction in relation to stress and depression among college students (n = 551). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted via a convenient sample between December 2020 and February 2021. Mean differences in the Perceived Stress Scale-10 scores and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale scores were examined using a one-way analysis of variance. Associations between stress, depression, and weight dissatisfaction were measured by logistic regression. Results: Weight dissatisfied (75.1%) students had significantly higher mean depression scores compared to weight satisfied. The weight dissatisfied students were 1.05 times more likely to be depressed compared to those who were weight satisfied. Significant mean differences in stress and/or depression were found for weight dissatisfied students by gender, race, parental status, marital status, residence, and U.S. citizenship. Weight dissatisfaction was higher than that reported in the literature, possibly due to the influence of social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: Strategies to reduce the prevalence of weight dissatisfaction for improved mental health should be explored, particularly efforts to reduce weight stigmatization and expand access to mental health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Civic actions are behaviours intended to improve conditions for others or help shape a community's future. Such actions vary widely from voting to voluntary helping, from canvassing to community organizing, and attempts have been made to categorize the array of civic actions. However, the question of why young adults engage in some types of civic actions versus others is not well understood. Using data from 598 White, cisgender, heterosexual young adults in the United States, we examined the relations between individual civic efficacy, collective civic efficacy, and seven actions: writing social media posts, voting, buycotting, volunteering, participating in an organization, supporting political candidates, and protesting. We hypothesized that individual efficacy would be positively related to all seven actions, but collective efficacy would be more strongly related to collective or political actions, compared to the individual or civil ones. Logistic regression analyses showed that individual efficacy positively predicted engagement in all seven civic actions. Individual and collective efficacy had a complex curvilinear relation with buycotting and supporting political candidates. Implications for future research and applications aimed at promoting civic engagement amongst young adults are discussed. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using newspaper articles and previously sealed court records, this article analyses Bhagat Singh Thind through his almost entirely overlooked short and turbulent marriage to Inez Buelen, a marriage that occurred less than a year after the Supreme Court decision that ruled Thind ineligible for American citizenship and only months into his decades-long career as a metaphysical lecturer. In contrast to the prevailing view that Thind's sense of his own race was unknowable, or that he defined himself as White as part of a legal strategy or a matter of expediency in gaining citizenship, I argue that the marriage and subsequent divorce show that he consistently claimed Whiteness for years after his Supreme Court case, both in public and in private, and on the basis of descent, geography, caste, racial science, previous court rulings, and his own blood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on a legal case involving Bhagat Singh Thind's application for US citizenship as a high-caste Hindu of Indian origin, examining questions about his classification as a "white person" under Section 2169 Revised Statutes and the implications of the 1917 Immigration Act on his eligibility for naturalization, along with the opinions and arguments presented in the case.

In 1923, the landmark Supreme Court case, United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind determined that Bhagat Singh Thind and all other "Hindus" were ineligible for citizenship because they did not meet the "common understanding" of white. This article explores the debates surrounding the question "who is the 'Hindu?'" in the United States in the early 1900s. The article depicts how the racialized category of "Hindu" was fabricated and constantly curated throughout the early twentieth century to protect the Anglo-American claim to whiteness. This challenges the idea that the category of "Hindu" was labeled as "non-white" following the United States v. Thind decision in 1923 and instead, highlights how the "Hindu" was always made to be "non-white." Here, the article showcases the leading discourses in written media, labor, and immigration policies surrounding the racial classification of South Asian men in the United States, also known as "Hindu/Hindoos," from 1906 to 1923. The question posed by these three American sources of discourse was not an ontological one set to explore the essence or being of "Hindu," but rather a brutal effort to place the "Hindu" in a position to fail in American racial politics. This article examines the development of the racial category of "Hindu" in labor and immigration discourse and how it became embedded within the American "common sense." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Second Amendment protects "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." But who are "the people" included in this right? One definition of "the people" could include anyone present in the United States. Another definition could distinguish between lawful permanent residents and temporary visitors to the United States. Finally, courts could adopt a definition that restricts Second Amendment rights to U.S. citizens only. This Comment will conclude that Supreme Court precedent and a traditional respect for the legislative and executive branches' power over alienage mean that only citizens have the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States faces a grave challenge in its fight against cyberattacks from abroad. Chief among the foreign cyber threats comes from a finite number of "ransomware-as-a-service" gangs, which are responsible for extorting billions of dollars from American citizens and companies annually. Prosecuting these cybercriminals has proven exceedingly difficult. Law enforcement often struggles to forensically trace ransomware attacks, which makes identifying and prosecuting the perpetrators challenging. Moreover, even when prosecutors can identify the perpetrators of these attacks, the ransomware gangs are headquartered in foreign adversarial nations that do not extradite criminals to the United States. Finally, ransomware gangs are governed by complex structures that push the limits of joint criminal enterprise liability. While these challenges are complex, they are not unprecedented. The United States has crafted successful legal solutions in response to similar challenges in its fight against the War on Terror. This Comment analyzes one of these legal solutions from the War on Terror, 8 U.S.C. § 1189, which establishes the Foreign Terrorist Organization list and assesses whether the State Department can and should designate foreign ransomware gangs as "Foreign Terrorist Organizations" (FTOs). This Comment argues that ransomware gangs qualify as "foreign organizations," engage in "terrorist activities as defined under the statute, and threaten the national security of the United States. Thus, ransomware gangs meet the statutory requirements for designation as FTOs. Given the prosecutorial and investigatory benefits and the useful financial and political implications of the designation, this Comment argues that the State Department should list ransomware gangs as FTOs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the Electoral College and the protection it provides for citizens against a cabal of corrupt individuals can usurp the will of the people. Topics include historical foundation of the Electoral College, the perceived impact of Chiafalo on faithless elector laws; and the potential threat the citizens of the Republic face from attempts to undermine the Electoral College, such as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

This study examines the testable question of whether junk news in the service of propaganda can form coherent narrative structure that can be analyzed and countered. The analysis was conducted using a known junk news site, USA Really, which is sponsored by the Russian Government, and which targets American citizens. Leveraging the Narrative Paradigm theory and ethnographic content analysis are the methods of research; an analysis of (N =150) were qualitatively analyzed. An unexpected finding that USA Really was constructing a conspiracy narrative targeting far right-wing extremists emerged. The study also identified a new type of narrative, not accounted for in narrative paradigm theory, that was meant to cause dissension rather than to serve as a guide for proper conduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides an overview of the naturalization adjudication process in the U.S. Topics include the applications that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services received between 2015 and 2018; citizenship status of immigrants; and the U.S. Supreme Court case Perez v. Brownell on the U.S. citizenship of an American who had voted in a foreign political election.

The article focuses on constitutional design and political community of Virginia during reconstruction, and civil war towards citizenship and public education. Topics include remove political disabilities consequent upon conviction for civil rights offenses committed prior or subsequent to the adoption of Constitution; and criminal justice system operates in a way on racial minorities on white Americans to restore voting rights.

Current U.S. immigration policies disproportionately impact Mexican‐origin mixed‐status families, yet few studies examine the consequences of immigration enforcement (e.g., immigration‐related arrest and detention) and deportation on sibling dynamics. Given this gap, this study focuses on the experiences and changes within sibling relationships in the aftermath of parental detention and deportation. We analyzed a subsample of 20 citizen children interviews (7 sibling dyads; 2 sibling triads) from a multi‐site binational study that examined the psychosocial functioning of U.S. citizen children with undocumented Mexican parents. Using inductive thematic analysis, we explored the roles and functional importance of sibling relationships before and after experiences of parents' detention and deportation. Our findings suggest that prior to detention or deportation experiences, sibling relationships were described as "normal." After these experiences, however, sibling relationships changed and developed protective adaptations, including more open communication about their experiences and the assumption of caregiving roles. In cases where deportation did not occur, there still existed the threat of future immigration‐related action, which contributed to fear and an inability to share feelings and experiences among siblings. Our findings suggest that sibling relationships might serve as an important locus of stability and protection. Yet, adaptive communication may not emerge as long as the threat of apprehension, detention, and deportation exists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concepts of citizenship and conscription in the Confederate States of America during the U.S. Civil War. It examines concerns about border security among southern slaveholders, immigration reform in the Confederate Congress, and questions about the responsibilities of citizens. The article also discusses English immigrant Richard Ogden as an example of shifting Confederate attitudes concerning citizenship.

Background: Restrictive state laws aimed at immigrants can have unintended consequences for health insurance coverage of United States citizens in immigrant families due to both actual barriers created by the laws and perceived barriers among immigrants. Increasing numbers of children in the U.S. are part of immigrant families, and these children are more likely to be living in poverty than their counterparts in native families. Immigrant restrictive policies could lead to reduced access to Medicaid and CHIP even for citizen children in immigrant families. Methods: Using data from the Current Population Survey's (CPS) March Supplement, linear probability models with difference-in-differences (DD) estimates compare probability of enrollment in Medicaid/CHIP among low-income U.S. citizen children in immigrant families and low-income children in native families and U.S. citizen children in immigrant families in states that did not adopt restrictive legislation, in order to estimate the impact of restrictive state laws aimed at immigrants. An additional model explores the effect of mother's citizenship on enrollment among all immigrant families in states with and without restrictive legislation. Results: Results suggest a significant chilling effect where the magnitude of the effect varies according to family demographics and by the types of laws being passed. Immigrant restrictive social welfare laws being adopted have a strong negative effect on U.S. citizen children in immigrant families' enrollment in Medicaid/CHIP, a 5.5 percentage point reduction in coverage. Among the subsample of only immigrant families, results point toward a global chilling effect created by an overall restrictive policy environment. All immigrant restrictive related laws, including those aimed at education, job restriction, identification access, and social welfare restrictions have a significant and negative impact on access to public insurance for U.S. citizen children with non-citizen mothers. Conclusions: This research shows that the unintended consequence of restrictive state legislation aimed at immigrants is the reduction in access to Medicaid and CHIP by low-income U.S. citizen children living in immigrant families. Reduced access to health insurance can increase unmet medical needs for an already vulnerable group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims at examining the way Constance Fenimore Woolson tackled the controversial issue of rebuilding the nation and redefining American citizenship after the Civil War in Rodman the Keeper: Southern Sketches, a collection of short stories released in 1880. The narratives explore the tensions between white Northerners, white Southerners, newly released African American slaves, and the Minorcans of Florida. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that historical narrative has held a significant role in Mexican American identity formation and civil rights activism by examining the way Mexican Americans in the 1930s and 1940s used history to claim full citizenship status in Texas. In particular, it centers on how George I. Sánchez (1906–1972), a scholar of Latin American education, revised historical narrative by weaving history and foreign policy together through a pragmatic lens. To educators and federal officials, Sánchez used this revisionist history to advocate for Mexican Americans, insisting that the Good Neighbor policy presented the United States with the chance to translate into reality the democratic ideals long professed in the American historical imagination. The example of Sánchez also prompts us to reexamine the historiography in our present day: How do we define the tradition and trajectory of Mexican American intellectual thought in U.S. history? This article posits that when Sánchez and other Mexican Americans thought about their community's collective identity and civil rights issues through history, they were contributing to a longer conversation driven by questions about identity formation and equality that first emerged at the end of the U.S. War with Mexico in 1848. These questions remain salient in the present, indicating the need for a historiographic examination that will change how we imagine the tradition of intellectual thought in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay reflects on the materiality of migration with a focus on passports and other kinds of documentary permissions for travel. It argues that throughout the history of the Americas passports have acquired meanings exceeding contemporary associations with national citizenship that are discernible in literary works and in the archival record. It looks to documentary practices in Latin America and the Caribbean to decenter the United States from studies of border crossing and Latinx subjectivities, suggesting intersecting hemispheric practices that delineate the relative importance of being documented or undocumented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What types of fears does immigration trigger in individuals and how do these fears differ across partisan lines? Prior research explores this question indirectly by linking immigration attitudes to respondents' demographics or to different threat frames. This research note offers a more direct test by designing a randomized experiment on a nationally representative sample of US citizens. I provide one half of the respondents with neutral information about immigration, while the other half serves as the control group. I find that respondents for whom the immigration issue is made salient (i.e. the treatment group) are more fearful of both their personal as well as national economic situation and about crime in their community than respondents in the control group. I further find that the overall effects are mainly driven by those respondents who self-identify as Republicans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses why the precariousness of citizenship in the U.S. is inconsistent with the basic principles of its constitution. Topics include the importance of the security of citizenship to the security of the country's democratic system, the meaning of citizenship in U.S. history, and the modern-day policy on citizenship, including the increasing use of denaturalization and citizenship challenges as of September 2021.

The article discusses nationalism among Mexicans and Mexican Americans in Texas from 1910 through 1940, including in regard to their sense of belonging, citizenship and the depiction of nationalism within literature. An overview of Mexican and Mexican Americans' sense of ethnic and national identity is provided. An overview of the impact that Mexico's Revolution of 1910 through 1920 had on the Mexican government's attempt to modernize the country into a nation-state is also provided.

Delivered as the Dignity in Law Symposium keynote address, this essay surveys uses of "dignity" in U.S. constitutional law, with a focus on conflicts between the dignities attached to citizenship and religious conscience. Parts I and II discuss dignity as state sovereignty and hierarchical status. Part III examines the collision of dignities in the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision. Part IV argues that attention to the public or private nature of the site where religious accommodation is demanded clarifies when accommodation is appropriate, using a house of worship and a government office as illustrations. Part V lists other sites of accommodation and briefly discusses how one might use the public/private distinction despite its socially constructed character. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigrant children in the US have very limited health insurance coverage and health care access. Immigration status is not static: Census data show that the majority of census respondents who enter as noncitizen children eventually become citizens. Eligibility restrictions that prevent noncitizen children from being publicly insured can contribute to their experiencing poorer health and higher medical costs in their adult lives. We isolate the impact of lack of citizenship from socioeconomic factors by comparing citizen and noncitizen siblings living in mixed-status families, using fixed-effects models to net out socioeconomic factors shared within families. Lacking citizenship increased a child's risk of being uninsured and lowered by 26 percentage points the chances that they would have Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program coverage. Noncitizen children had significantly more delays in needed medical care because of cost, primarily mediated by the lack of insurance coverage. The US should reexamine policies that exclude noncitizen children from public health insurance programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advocacy organizations have reframed immigrants as deserving, and improved their access to services and support; yet, we know little about how low-income immigrants understand organizational frames to make individual requests in public institutions and programmes. Analyzing in-depth interviews and fieldwork over multiple years, we show how Filipina/o and Latina/o immigrants become empowered to make claims through an organization's frame of low-income residents as rightful community members in San Francisco – a self-declared "sanctuary" city where residents have formal access and protections regardless of immigrant or legal status. However, despite newfound confidence and rights awareness, Latina/o participants continually anticipate racialized treatment where others construct them as inferior and illegitimate, which depresses their claims-making. In contrast, Filipina/o participants felt othered in public programmes and institutions, but not blocked by feelings of mistreatment and illegitimacy. We push for attention to how racialization differentially operates for immigrant groups and affects the claims-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most nineteenth-century political debates over U.S. citizenship revolved around the claims of people, often African Americans or immigrants, who aspired to that status. But Native American citizenship's genealogy began instead with the United States assertion of the right to purchase or conquer the territory of its Indigenous neighbors, to replace them as its sole or primary inhabitants, and to make policy for the people thereby dispossessed. These very different histories of citizenship collided in 1866, when the U.S. Senate considered how to codify that status in the Civil Rights Act and Fourteenth Amendment. This article interprets these debates as the collision of an array of distinct and divergent settler colonial processes and experiences. It argues that the ultimate resolution—a half-articulated commitment to let local settler communities decide—both contradicted the ostensible purposes of the Civil Rights Act and accurately reflected how the era's settler colonial society understood the purposes and functions of Native citizenship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brazil, the largest slave society in the Americas, proposed a citizenship in its 1824 Constitution that had no race-based criteria. The nation remained steadfastly committed to slavery, however, importing nearly 800,000 enslaved Africans illegally after the transatlantic slave trade was abolished in 1831. The silences and ambiguities in Brazil's terms of citizenship were precisely what enabled the nation to exclude Africans and keep many in illegal captivity. I focus on two groups of Africans, those who remained illegally enslaved, and those who had been 'rescued' from illegal slave ships and granted special status as 'Free Africans.' I compare their condition to that of indigenous Brazilians who were similarly enslaved illegally and excluded from citizenship on implicitly racial terms. By revealing how citizenship denial is integral to the history of freedom, their condition offers a necessary critique to studies of the 'Age of Emancipation.' [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]