Chapter 1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND UT OF THE ETERNAL LONGING and quest for freedom, the story of this country has been written. Millions from many faraway lands crossed strange oceans and came here to realize their dream of liberty. The dreams and visions that they realized in turn became a part of America. The foreign born of yesterday and the foreign born of today present no new story. Both wrote chapters in the saga of America. Like the Pilgrim Fathers of old, many of the present-day immigrants fled their native lands to escape bitterness, intolerance, and oppression. Some brought to this country little except courage and hope. Others brought something more: precious skills and talents in science, music, art, and in other fields. Each of these made his contribution, building, renewing, and enriching this great Nation and making it the inspiration of liberty-loving and oppressed peoples everywhere. 1 The immigrants of today follow the same road to citizenship that was taken by our forefathers. Long ago Congress established the judicial way as the road from foreign allegiance to United States citizenship. Through the portals of the courtroom pass the immigrants to receive this citizenship. Since 1790, when the first naturalization law was passed by Congress, naturalization has been a judicial procedure. Attention, therefore, focuses on the induction ceremony-the climax of the naturalization processwhich clothes a foreigner "with the privileges of a native citizen. 3 Although the Constitution provided that Congress shall have the power "to establish an uniform rule of naturalization," 3 until 1906 aliens were admitted to citizenship largely in accordance with the wisdom and method of the individual judge. Both Federal and State courts were charged with responsibility for naturalizing new 'Act of March 26, 1790, 1 Stat. 103. * Boyd v. Thayer, 143 U. S. 162 (1892); 9 Op. Atty. Gen. 359 (1859). 'Art. I, Section 8 (4). citizens, but they were far from being uniform in their rulings and practices. For example, there was no uniform rule as to the number of witnesses required for each petitioner. Nor was there uniformity in record keeping. Even the type of naturalization document that the court issued depended somewhat upon the printer from whom the clerk of the court got his supplies. Toward the end of the last century and in the early years of the present, aliens in great numbers were exploited for political and industrial purposes. Fraud was prevalent in many jurisdictions. Just preceding election, in many instances, aliens were "rounded up" and taken to the office of the clerk of the court or before a "political" judge. Thereupon, naturalization papers were made out. Many of the new citizens were "run through the hopper" for purely selfish considerations, either political or industrial. Nothing was said or done during the inducting process that stressed the value of citizenship, or its obligations. The Nation's greatest gift was bestowed with little or no dignity and with no recognition of what citizenship really meant. These shameful practices finally led to an investigation that resulted in the enactment of a basic naturalization law by Congress in 1906. Of special significance in this law was the provision that enabled the Federal Government to set up an executive bureau (The Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, in the Department of Commerce and Labor, which has by merger and transfer now become the Immigration and Naturalization Service in the Department of Justice) to administer and supervise the processes of naturalization. Improvement in the entire naturalization process immediately followed. The vicious practice of "rushing" naturalization cases for political purposes was practically ended by the provision forbidding the naturalizing of any person or the issuance of any certificate of naturalization during the 30 days preceding a general election within the area of the court's jurisdiction. Having administrative control, the Immigration and Naturalization Service worked toward uniform standards for examinations and toward uniformity in forms and record keeping. The removal of selfish outside pressure and the improvement in procedures opened the way for a new spirit to permeate the process of naturalization. Although the Act of 1906 established no educational standard for the petitioner, except that he be able to sign his name, speak the English language, and satisfy the court that he was "attached" to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, the courts almost uniformly held that the applicant for citizenship could not be "attached" to the principles of the Constitution if he did not know what the Constitution contained. Many of the courts also held that the applicant not only should understand the Constitution, but that he should have a knowledge of the Declaration of Independence, vitally related to it, and of the early history of the United States. This resulted in the development of a system of examining applicants for citizenship to determine their attitude toward our Government and their knowledge of the Constitution and history of our country. On September 23, 1950, Congress legislatively affirmed these court rulings and made such knowledge a specific requisite for citizenship. In addition, applicants were required to demonstrate an ability to read and write, as well as speak words in ordinary usage in the English language, exceptions being made in the cases of persons over 50 years of age who had resided in the United States for more than 20 years. These provisions were substantially reenacted in the Immigration and Nationality Act which became effective December 24, 1952.* In recent years there has been an increasing tendency to hold naturalizations in Federal courts rather than in State courts. Most petitions for naturalization now are heard in the Federal courts, whereas in earlier years most cases were handled in the State courts. In the Federal courts, practically all the examinations of prospective citizens are now made by the examiners of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. At the present time a high percentage of those recommended by the examiners are accepted without question by the courts. The appearance of witnesses for the petitioner at the final hearing is not now generally required either in the Federal or State courts. This elimination of witnesses from appearance in the courtroom, together with the court's acceptance of the report of the examiner without further examination of the petitioner, '8 U. S. C. 1423. |