Talk:Cable Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Research and Reference
When I came upon the Cable Act entry originally it was under that old misconception that it took away womens rights. As I said then, people posted this up here because the read it from some other website that is unreliable. Think this subject over logically, why would a law be made to take away female citizenship when in 1920 the 19th Amendment was passed (the right for women to vote). I have posted references before and whoever edited the page after me had two mistakes:
- 1. "This piece of legislation made it so that any female citizen who married an "alien ineligible for citizenship" would give up her citizenship. She would regain her citizenship if she were to divorce the non citizen."
This is WAS the old law until it was changed in 1922, do your research from an official site, perhaps open a book, or visit a library and you will find this out yourself.
- 2. "The Cable Act of 1922 reveals the anti-nonwhite sentiment in the early 1900s. It is a blatant attack at male immigrants from the Pacific as well as African Americans, who were ineligible for citizenship, for attempting to be romantically involved with Caucasian women."
What do African Americans (unless your referring to African immigrants, which as you may not realize, are a insignificant percentage of immigrants in the 1920's) have to do with immigration status, they ARE ALREADY US CITIZENS.
So as you may already know, cite your source...especially if you edit this article. refer to my entry below for more info on why the misconception is false. -MarlonG
[edit] Government Archive
- "...Happily, Congress was at work and on September 22, 1922, passed the Married Women's Act, also known as the Cable Act. This 1922 law finally gave each woman a nationality of her own. No marriage since that date has granted U.S. citizenship to any alien woman nor taken it from any U.S.-born women who married an alien eligible to naturalization.(11) Under the new law women became eligible to naturalize on (almost) the same terms as men."
This was taken from http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1998/summer/women-and-naturalization-1.html which as you can see is from the official US government archives. Also the other links I put up before on the reference portion will confirm this. Anyone really interested in this should note that specific restrictions were put on alien women marrying Naturalized men.(civilians not born in the US but have undergone US citizenship) Basically they had to apply for naturalization, which they could now attempt to do because of the Cable Act.
So once again, CITE YOUR SOURCES and make sure they are valid websites (an example is the government archives). Also please do not violate copyright laws by plagiarizing the government archives nor the quote above.-MarlonG
[edit] Cable Act & Women Married to "Ineligible Aliens"
It appears that there have been some misunderstandings amongst article contributors, with regards to the changes that the Cable Act of 1922 did or did not effect.
I have done my best to go over the review history log, as well as the discussion for this article. There have been a series of revisions and reversions, presumably because of a lack of reliable source citations. I have done my best to utilize reliable sources, citing only university (.edu) and governmental (.gov) websites.
First, I would like to address MarlonG's point regarding "the old misconception that it took away womens rights" (sp). It is my understanding that MarlonG's position is that the Cable Act helped women's rights, since "women became eligible to naturalize on (almost) the same terms as men" under the new law. It is true that the Cable Act did reverse many of the old laws regarding female citizenship; it is true that the new law granted MANY women "a nationality of her own", independent of her husband.
However, we should pay close attention to the quotation that Marlon G cited earlier (http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1998/summer/women-and-naturalization-1.html):
"No marriage since that date has granted U.S. citizenship to any alien woman nor taken it from any U.S.-born women who married an alien eligible to naturalization.(11)"
Please pay attention to the key phrase "alien eligible to naturalization". Laws prior to 1922 "made no distinctions about the race of the foreigner; marriage to any alien would cause loss of citizenship" (http://mcel.pacificu.edu/aspac/home/papers/scholars/brown/brown.php3). However, the Cable Act only PARTIALLY reversed such laws. During the passing of the Cable Act, alien Asian men were NOT considered to be "eligible to naturalization". This is supported by the following passage from a Smithsonian Institution website (http://www.apa.si.edu/Curriculum%20Guide-Final/teacherhistory.htm):
"In 1922, the Cable Act stripped American women of their citizenship if they married "aliens ineligible for naturalization," meaning Asians. In 1922 as well, the Japanese-born Takao Ozawa was denied naturalization, in accordance with the 1790 Naturalization Act, which allowed only "free White persons" to become U.S. citizens. In 1923, insisting that he was biologically Caucasian, Bhagat Singh Thind applied for naturalization, but the U.S. vs. Bhagat Singh Thind decision officially barred Asian Indians, as well, from citizenship."
The following timeline from a University of Houston website also supports this point (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/asian_voices/asian_timeline.cfm):
"The Cable Act revokes the American citizenship of any woman who marries an alien ineligible for U.S. citizenship. In Takao Ozawa v. United States, the Supreme Court upholds the Naturalization Law which declared Japanese and other Asian immigrants ineligible for citizenship."
Finally, let's look at the National Archives website that MarlonG originally referred to. The original statement in question is followed by footnote #11. That footnote, on the second page of that site (http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1998/summer/women-and-naturalization-2.html), states that:
"11. Until 1931, women still expatriated themselves by marriage to an alien racially ineligible to naturalize."
Therefore, we can see that, in addition to other reliable academic sources, the very website that MarlonG cited acknowledges that the Cable Act's guarantee of independent female citizenship DID NOT apply to women who were married to “racially ineligible” alien Asian men.
Secondly, I would like to address the question in which MarlonG asked: "why would a law be made to take away female citizenship when in 1920 the 19th Amendment was passed (the right for women to vote)"?
The Cable Act's exclusion of women married to alien Asian men was not so much a matter of taking away female citizenship/rights, as it was a matter of discrimination against Asian men. As the following paper from Pacific University's Asian Studies website states (http://mcel.pacificu.edu/aspac/home/papers/scholars/brown/brown.php3):
"...legislators began to define the type of foreigner an American woman may marry. Although they still wished to combine the goals of encouraging world harmony through international marriages with their desire to grant equality to white women, they qualified their effort with the caveat that the foreigners they marry not be Japanese or Chinese [...] Because the only aliens deemed ineligible for American citizenship were Chinese and Japanese, the law effectively proscribed marriages with them."
Thus, in the minds of legislators, the Cable Act did not conflict with the precedents of increasing womens' rights (e.g.: the 19th amendment). Furthermore, the Cable Act was also consistent with an overall trend of national and state laws which discriminated against Asians and Asian males in particular.
These are the justifications for my revision of the article on the Cable Act of 1922 to include the information regarding the denial of U.S. citizenship to women married to "aliens ineligible for naturalization". I have done my best make my revisions on the main article with neutral language and several reliable academic sources. I may provide additional paper-based academic sources sometime in the future. I respectfully ask other contributors to NOT blindly revert this article to a previous state without first providing reliable academic sources as justification, and/or attempting to at least engage in further discussion on the talk page. JK Hahn 21:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your additions and for properly citing your sources in an articulate and correct fashion. I would like to stress though that while the law did discriminate against Chinese and Japanese (and possibly other Asian nationalities), for most situations this law was a great relief for women who married any other foreign nationality. The law went from discriminating wives of foreigners to specifically wives of people with Asian ethnicity. This was still an improvement within our legal system, granted it was very flawed. I am very sceptical about these other "sections" as the law is mainly about the rights of female citizens and now the article consists of 2/3 about discriminating against Asians. The article stub reads like it skims over what benefits women received. -MarlonG
- I understand and acknowledge your concern about the benefits that women received as a result of the Cable Act. However, I think the idea that the law was "mainly" about female citizens' rights should be balanced with consideration that legislators and advocates of the bill (both male and female) often held discriminatory positions which were made explicit during the course of the law's enactment. Also, whether the Cable Act led to an "improvement" within the legal system depends on whom you ask.
- I believe that your concerns could be addressed by the addition and supplementing of material about women's rights, rather than exclusion or removal of material dealing with discrimination against Asians.
- Perhaps the article can elaborate upon the significance of the act on the rights of female citizens. I am not too familiar with all the categories on Wikipedia, but perhaps this article could also be included in a women's rights-related category. JK Hahn 10:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Addition of Categories
I am including this article into the "Chinese American History" and "Japanese American History" categories, as this piece of legislation was meant to specifically exclude women married to alien Chinese and Japanese men in the United States. I believe there may be other categories to which this article could be added; however, I am taking a conservative approach at this time. I do know if others here would regard this as a minor or major edit; regardless, I believe changes to this article's categorization should be open to discussion, just to be safe. JK Hahn 19:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Please refer to above comment. -MarlonG
- As noted earlier, perhaps this article could also be included under some women's rights-related categories. JK Hahn 10:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Repealed
It might be good information for the article to mention when this law was repealed. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to the University of Houston site (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/asian_voices/asian_timeline.cfm): In 1931, the Cable Act was amended "to allow American women to retain their citizenship after marrying aliens ineligible for U.S. citizenship." And in 1936, the Cable Act was repealed. JK Hahn 08:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
