Analyzing the Impact of the Nationality Act of 1790 and Proposition 227/58 on Citizenship and Education in America

Posted on | by Linus

Part 1
Directions:
Summary
Congress first defined eligibility for citizenship by naturalizationin this law, and limited this important right to “free white persons.” In practice, only white, male property owners could naturalize and acquire the status of citizens, whereas women, nonwhite persons, and indentured servants could not. Access to citizenship would become more expansive over time; although, the racial restriction was not eliminated entirely until 1952. This law produced the legal category of “aliens ineligible for citizenship ” which largely affected Asian immigrants and limited their rights as noncitizens to key realms of life in the United States such as property ownership, representation in courts, public employment, and voting.
Source
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alienbeing a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States . . .
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Post your answers to the following questions after also reading Parts 1, 2, and 3 here.
After Congress passed the Nationality Act of 1790, who could become a citizen through naturalization and what did eligible immigrants have to do to gain citizenship rights?
Who would have been excluded from citizenship through naturalization under the Nationality Act of 1790?
How might access or a lack of access to naturalization and citizenshiprights have impacted different immigrant communities over time? Look up how many years later women got the right to vote and own property and the Civil Rights Act took place. Now, consider how owning a house, for example, can increase a family’s wealth and opportunity for inheritance over time ( a 300,000 dollar home requires a minimum of 60,000 dollars in cash to take out a reasonable loan …20% down and the bank loans the rest. Working hourly on minimum wage, it is difficulty to save 60,000 dollars in cash–Many families area able to put that cash payment down through inheritance after a family member dies, the home is either inheritated or sold, providing cash for another purchase. Over time, all the members of the family begin to own property and wealth accumulation and wealth transfer along the security it provides is established. This often takes generations to build if the family was not already royalty (rich to start with). Gollnick and Chinn (2021) talk about the “myth of the meritocracy” and the American attachment to “working hard to get ahead.” (p.16) What is the meritocracy, in this context why do Gollnick and Chinn (2021) call it “the Myth of the Meritocracy” and how did working hard to get ahead allow some to get ahead and some to stay in place? Make connections here to historical legal obstacles and what these laws revealed about American culture. Cite Gollnick and Chinn (2021) accurately using APA citation style.
Part 2
The links available are just a starting point. They are not the only place you should go to research your topic. You will need to go beyond the links to answer the questions. You will need to use the textbook also and find other information on the internet. In the Learning Module on Law and Education are live links to information on each law or court case to get you started.
This is the law I am doing (prop 227 and prop 58)
https://edsource.org/2017/a-new-era-for-bilingual-education-explaining-californias-proposition-58/574852.
research the law you have selected and present a brief summary of the law including this information. Presentation shouldn’t be no more than five to seven minutes.
• What is the law (Define it/state the law or case decision)?
• What was the historical treatment of those who are now being protected by the law or court decision? In general, how were the people (who are now protected) being treated and why?
• What is the story of the law or case? Tell who was wronged or whose rights were violated, or who needed protection and why?
• What is the result/impact on students, teachers, and schooling? What are the implications for educators and classroom practice? Re-visit Chapter 1. Reflect the following American cultural concepts: the meritocracy and egalitarianism, the dominant culture, privilege, marginalization, acculturation, assimilation, cultural identity, cultural relativism, social justice. Consider these concepts are defined. Historically, what groups in America have enjoyed the benefits of these concepts and what groups have not and why? Is it possible to work hard and not get ahead in America? Why? Explain how these concepts maybe understood differently by different groups. How do you explain your upbringing related to these concepts? (cite the text). Always cite articles (using APA in-text citation format, text chapters (author and date), page if you are quoting word-for-word, and videos when appropriate. The point in all discussions is showing that you can analyze and discuss using supportive evidence from the assigned readings.
Prepare a presentation addressing your law. Use APA within your presentation. Write your informed professional opinion. This means you give your opinion only if you can support what you say or explain what you say with references to the theories and concepts from the text and readings.

Struggling with where to start this assignment? Follow this guide to tackle your assignment easily!

Part 1: Analysis of the Nationality Act of 1790 and its Historical Context

1. Who could become a citizen through naturalization under the Nationality Act of 1790, and what did eligible immigrants have to do to gain citizenship rights?

  • Summary of Citizenship Eligibility: According to the Nationality Act of 1790, only “free white persons” who had resided within the United States for two years could apply for citizenship. They had to be of good character, take an oath to support the U.S. Constitution, and prove they had lived in the country for the required amount of time. The children of these naturalized citizens, if under 21 years old, also gained citizenship.

2. Who would have been excluded from citizenship through naturalization under the Nationality Act of 1790?

  • Excluded Groups: Nonwhite persons, women, and indentured servants were excluded. The racial restriction meant that Asian immigrants and other nonwhite groups were not eligible for citizenship. Additionally, women were not able to naturalize independently, and their legal status was tied to their fathers or husbands.

3. How might access or lack of access to naturalization and citizenship rights have impacted different immigrant communities over time?

  • Historical Impact: The exclusion from citizenship meant that certain communities (especially nonwhite immigrants, such as Asian and Black individuals) were denied many rights. For example, they couldn’t own property, vote, or access public services in the same way white citizens could. As a result, these groups were marginalized and faced systemic inequalities. The denial of citizenship also impacted generational wealth accumulation since noncitizens couldn’t own property, limiting their ability to pass on assets to their descendants. Over time, this compounded the economic disparity between white Americans and immigrant communities.

4. Consider the concept of “Meritocracy” and why Gollnick and Chinn (2021) refer to it as a “Myth”

  • Meritocracy Concept: In the context of the Nationality Act of 1790, meritocracy suggests that success and upward mobility come from hard work and talent. However, Gollnick and Chinn (2021) argue that the “myth of the meritocracy” is based on an unequal foundation. Historical legal barriers, like the 1790 law, meant that not everyone had equal access to the opportunities that would allow them to succeed. As a result, groups historically marginalized by race, gender, and immigration status were often denied the chance to work hard and get ahead.
  • Historical Legal Obstacles and American Culture: Laws like the Nationality Act of 1790 reflected American culture’s exclusionary practices. By limiting citizenship to only certain groups, the law reinforced existing power structures, keeping wealth, education, and political power concentrated among white, male property owners. It created an unequal system where “hard work” alone couldn’t overcome racial and gender barriers.

Citation for Gollnick & Chinn (2021):

  • Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2021). Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic Society. Pearson Education.

Part 2: Research on Proposition 227 and Proposition 58 (Bilingual Education)

1. Brief Summary of the Law (Proposition 227 & 58):

  • Proposition 227 (1998): This law effectively banned bilingual education in California public schools and mandated that non-English-speaking students be placed in English immersion programs. The rationale behind it was to push for faster assimilation into English-speaking society.
  • Proposition 58 (2016): This proposition repealed Proposition 227, allowing school districts to offer bilingual education programs and giving parents more control over how their children would be educated. Proposition 58 was a response to the growing recognition of the value of bilingualism and multiculturalism in California’s diverse population.

2. Historical Treatment of Protected Groups:

  • Before Proposition 227: Immigrant students, especially those from Spanish-speaking backgrounds, were often segregated into special classes that did not support their bilingual education. They were often treated as “less capable” or as needing to “catch up” rather than being seen as holding valuable linguistic skills. Proposition 227 reflected a belief in assimilation that ignored the benefits of bilingualism and marginalized immigrant languages.
  • Before Proposition 58: Immigrant students were limited by laws that restricted access to bilingual education. Many were placed in English-only programs, which often resulted in language barriers and academic struggles.

3. The Story of the Law:

  • Who was wronged and needed protection? Immigrant children and their families were harmed by Proposition 227, as it denied them access to bilingual education, essential for preserving their cultural identity while also succeeding academically. Proposition 58 sought to correct this by giving families the option to choose bilingual education.

4. Impact on Students, Teachers, and Schooling:

  • Impact on Students: Proposition 58 allows students to maintain their heritage language while acquiring English, which can lead to greater academic success and cultural pride. In contrast, Proposition 227’s elimination of bilingual programs was detrimental to many students who struggled with English.
  • Impact on Teachers: Teachers now have more flexibility to design programs that accommodate the diverse linguistic backgrounds of their students. They can use bilingual approaches to teaching, promoting inclusivity and academic achievement.
  • Implications for Educators: Teachers must understand the value of bilingualism, cultural identity, and social justice to effectively support immigrant students. Educators need to embrace diversity and teach in ways that respect students’ cultural backgrounds.

5. Reflecting Cultural Concepts:

  • Meritocracy and Egalitarianism: Proposition 227 reflected a narrow view of meritocracy that focused on assimilating students rather than recognizing the value of their existing linguistic abilities. Proposition 58 challenges this by promoting bilingualism, which can improve educational outcomes and better reflect an egalitarian society.
  • Dominant Culture and Privilege: The dominant culture’s focus on English-only education marginalized immigrant cultures and languages. Proposition 58 reflects a shift toward recognizing the value of diversity.
  • Acculturation vs. Assimilation: Acculturation values both the immigrant’s heritage and their new culture, whereas assimilation forces a one-sided cultural exchange. Proposition 58 supports acculturation by allowing immigrant children to retain their cultural identity while integrating into society.

Citation for Proposition 58:

Conclusion:

  • Summarize the importance of understanding how historical legal barriers have shaped contemporary issues like naturalization, citizenship, and education.
  • Reflect on how legal changes, such as those in the Nationality Act of 1790 and Proposition 227/58, reflect broader cultural shifts, particularly in terms of equality, privilege, and the values of meritocracy and multiculturalism.
Posted in Law

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount