Based on relevant assigned readings as well as original Court rulings, write a comprehensive essay in which you – through the context of two different court cases – analyze the Supreme Court’s...

ESSAY
TOPIC: ANALYSIS OF THE SUPREME COURT’S ATTEMPTS TO GRAPPLE WITH ISSUES OF RACE BETWEEN 1850s AND 20th CENTURY.
INTRODUCTION
The study analyses the relevant decisions made by the courts between 1850s and early 20th century, in grappling the issues related to racism and color. The thesis includes detailed research of the hearings ruled by Supreme Court in Ozawa (1922) and Thind(1923) cases. And based on these cases, the study reflects the issue of citizenship grant by the court to immigrants. The court declares them as ineligible for attaining US citizenship due to racism.
    But the concept of ‘race’ is not same in all the cases. In different cases, the judges explain different perspectives of race. Few cases are dealt with scientific definition and in some cases, the same definition is sought incorrect. It implies that the decisions of Supreme Court are not strictly adhered to the law. They are manipulated by them according to their preference, will and perspectives.
SCOTUS or the Supreme Court of the United States, in early decades of its establishment continued favoring the Government in power in all the decisions. But later on after 1985, it underwent revival of judicial enforcement of federalism.
The study provides evidence of working style of Judges while taking decisions during 1850-2000.
MAIN THESIS
Japanese, Asian Indians and Chinese had been undergoing social, political and judicial struggle over their status in America, for the last three decades.
The two Supreme Court decisions Takao Ozawa v. US (1922) and U.S. v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923) ruled that Japanese and Asian Indians were racially ineligible for citizenship. Hence, cast them as inassimilable aliens and helped form the racial category-‘Asians’.
In 1906 Charles Bonaparte, the US attorney General held Japanese to be ineligible of citizenship and instructed the clerks of court, not to address Japanese petitions. Asian Indians can be eligible due to 1870 British agreement of reciprocity. But later on in 1907, Bonaparte issued instructions not to regard natives of British India, as white persons. Even after these instructions, hundreds of Japanese and South Asian Indians became naturalized citizens during 1900 and 1910.
Immigrants who were denied the citizenship on the basis of ‘race’ went on to federal courts for redress. In every case, court’s decision turned on whether the petitioner could be considered as a ‘white’ person within the meaning of statute. The possibility of being defined as a Black was never considered. There was an unequal status associated with blackness. The racial ineligibility implied a status of inferiority and also contradicted the democracy in America.
Takao Okawa argued his case for the citizenship on basis of his moral character, his assimilation into American society and his true embrace for American true ideals. He worked for an American Company, spoke fluent English and did not play cards, drink or smoke. As he said in the court, “In name, I am not an American but at heart I am a true American.”
Bhagat Singh Thind also argued that he was willing to take the responsibilities of citizenship and had bought liberty bonds to help carry on America’s part in the war and had enlisted in the fighting forces of the country. Thind was a veteran of the world war and had come to US from Punjab in 1913.
Otawa and Thind thus argued their claims on the basis of Principle of consensual citizenship but that principle was always a double edged sword for the idea of required social consent by both the individual and community.
Supreme Court’s most forceful Dredd Scott Decision articulated the most exclusionary side of consent. Chief Justice Taney’s statement ‘Negroes had no rights that white people were bound to respect’ reflects that Negroes were not party to the...