Kevin

all the way until the 14th Amendment and the New Naturalization Act of 1870. And that's when white Americans say, particularly the radical Republicans, they could see that the attempt on the part of the Southerners was to reintroduce slavery through a loophole in the 13th Amendment.

And so in the 14th Amendment, they recognized natural-born citizenship for the freedmen, as well as they changed naturalization policy. And so you have whites and blacks can become citizens. This did not include other races. This did not include Asians for purposes of migration, nor did it include Indians for That status would change for Indians under public law in the 1920s. What and why?

And so in the 14th Amendment, they recognized natural-born citizenship for the freedmen, as well as they changed naturalization policy. And so you have whites and blacks can become citizens. This did not include other races. This did not include Asians for purposes of migration, nor did it include Indians for That status would change for Indians under public law in the 1920s. What and why?

Why did they do this? Well, I think it was those three basic points. One was how do you have a common mind? The idea of a common citizenry, so you have a country for its citizens. Second, how do we bring over immigrants who are going to share some of our common values? This is one of the reasons why the laborers did not want a large number of Chinese immigrants at the end of the 19th century.

Why did they do this? Well, I think it was those three basic points. One was how do you have a common mind? The idea of a common citizenry, so you have a country for its citizens. Second, how do we bring over immigrants who are going to share some of our common values? This is one of the reasons why the laborers did not want a large number of Chinese immigrants at the end of the 19th century.

They were very much afraid that they would bring over a kind of paternalistic view of the ends of government. That's also why many of the Irish posed such a problem. You know, 75% of the Germans, they migrated off to the countryside, but about 75% of the Irish settled down in major cities.

They were very much afraid that they would bring over a kind of paternalistic view of the ends of government. That's also why many of the Irish posed such a problem. You know, 75% of the Germans, they migrated off to the countryside, but about 75% of the Irish settled down in major cities.

And the claim was is they brought much of their paternalistic or view of government that focused on patronage. And, of course, every time you have mass migration, it increases crime. It also increases the inflation. entitlements program or the welfare programs of the localities and the states, and of course today, the federal government. And so from 1880 to 1920, we do see a change.

And the claim was is they brought much of their paternalistic or view of government that focused on patronage. And, of course, every time you have mass migration, it increases crime. It also increases the inflation. entitlements program or the welfare programs of the localities and the states, and of course today, the federal government. And so from 1880 to 1920, we do see a change.

We see the admittance of new groups. And I think that for us, and we can look at the last two waves of immigration, this poses a kind of challenge. And that is in the founding period, they thought diversity undermined the kind of order necessary for Republican freedoms. We have a diverse regime, right? That's what we know.

We see the admittance of new groups. And I think that for us, and we can look at the last two waves of immigration, this poses a kind of challenge. And that is in the founding period, they thought diversity undermined the kind of order necessary for Republican freedoms. We have a diverse regime, right? That's what we know.

And I think the challenge to us is, is how do we maintain this sense of unity so that we can protect those Republican freedoms and freedom under the law? And so I can go to the last two waves in law. You have 1880 to 1920. These were largely Southeastern Europeans. And that created all kinds of problems, the attempt to assimilate them into the body politic.

And I think the challenge to us is, is how do we maintain this sense of unity so that we can protect those Republican freedoms and freedom under the law? And so I can go to the last two waves in law. You have 1880 to 1920. These were largely Southeastern Europeans. And that created all kinds of problems, the attempt to assimilate them into the body politic.

It was also the case that they introduced new institutions to try to manage the migrants. What we look at is the family courts today. If you read Roscoe Pound, this was the dean of Harvard Law, he's writing about the family courts. And he says these are introduced to manage all of these Southeastern Europeans who are coming over here who don't know our ways.

It was also the case that they introduced new institutions to try to manage the migrants. What we look at is the family courts today. If you read Roscoe Pound, this was the dean of Harvard Law, he's writing about the family courts. And he says these are introduced to manage all of these Southeastern Europeans who are coming over here who don't know our ways.

And so in the family court, you don't have due process rights. You have maxims of equity that guide all the rulings of the judge. If you don't follow them, you're in contempt of court. So what happened after the 1920s was two laws passed, 1921 and 1924, and they introduced a national origins quota, and this would have basically froze out those who could migrate to the United States.

And so in the family court, you don't have due process rights. You have maxims of equity that guide all the rulings of the judge. If you don't follow them, you're in contempt of court. So what happened after the 1920s was two laws passed, 1921 and 1924, and they introduced a national origins quota, and this would have basically froze out those who could migrate to the United States.

70% of all migrants would come from just three countries, Northwestern European countries. But the real effect of that immigration law of 1924 was it stopped immigration generally. So the percentage of foreign born in 1920 was about 14%. When you get to 1960, it's about four or 5%.

70% of all migrants would come from just three countries, Northwestern European countries. But the real effect of that immigration law of 1924 was it stopped immigration generally. So the percentage of foreign born in 1920 was about 14%. When you get to 1960, it's about four or 5%.

And what that meant was all Americans just had more kids, Americans of all different races, because there was a prioritization on those who were natural born citizens. The 1965 Immigration Act, as we all know, changed much of that. And one of the great dangers that it introduced was this.