Whereas within the aftermath of the veto of the Fifteen Passenger Bill, President Hayes initiated the renegotiation of the Burlingame Treaty, requesting that the Chinese government consent to restrictions on the immigration of Chinese persons to the United States; Whereas these negotiations culminated within the Angell Treaty, ratified by the Senate on May 9, 1881, which– (1) allowed the United States to suspend, however to not prohibit, the immigration of Chinese laborers; (2) declared that “Chinese laborers who are actually within the United States shall be allowed to go and come of their own free will”; and (3) reaffirmed that Chinese persons possessed “all the rights, privileges, immunities, and exemptions which are accorded to the residents and topics of essentially the most favored nation”; Whereas, on March 9, 1882, the Senate passed the primary Chinese Exclusion Act, which purported to implement the Angell Treaty however instead excluded for 20 years both expert and unskilled Chinese laborers, rejected an amendment that would have permitted the naturalization of Chinese individuals, and instead expressly denied Chinese persons the best to be naturalized as American residents; Whereas, on April 4, 1882, President Chester A. Arthur vetoed the primary Chinese Exclusion Act as being incompatible with the phrases and spirit of the Angell Treaty; Whereas, on May 6, 1882, Congress passed the second Chinese Exclusion Act, which– (1) prohibited expert and unskilled Chinese laborers from entering the United States for 10 years; (2) was the primary Federal legislation that excluded a single group of individuals on the basis of race; and (3) required sure Chinese laborers already legally present in the United States who later wished to reenter to acquire “certificates of return”, an unprecedented requirement that applied only to Chinese residents; Whereas, in response to experiences that courts have been bestowing United States citizenship on persons of Chinese descent, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 explicitly prohibited all State and Federal courts from naturalizing Chinese persons; Whereas the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 underscored the belief of some Senators at the moment that– (1) the Chinese people had been unfit to be naturalized; (2) the social traits of the Chinese have been “revolting”; (3) Chinese immigrants were “like parasites”; and (4) the United States “is under God a rustic of Caucasians, a country of white males, a country to be governed by white males”; Whereas, on July 3, 1884, notwithstanding United States treaty obligations with China and other nations, Congress broadened the scope of the Chinese Exclusion Act– (1) to apply to all persons of Chinese descent, “whether or not topics of China or every other foreign energy”; and (2) to offer more stringent necessities limiting Chinese immigration; Whereas, on October 1, 1888, redcirclelawfirms.com the Scott Act was enacted into legislation, which– (1) prohibited all Chinese laborers who would select or had chosen to leave the United States from reentering; (2) cancelled all beforehand issued “certificates of return”, which prevented roughly 20,000 Chinese laborers abroad, including 600 people who had been en route to the United States, from returning to their families or their properties; and (3) was later determined by the Supreme Court to have abrogated the Angell Treaty; Whereas, on May 5, 1892, the Geary Act was enacted into regulation, which– (1) prolonged the Chinese Exclusion Act for 10 years; (2) required all Chinese individuals within the United States, however no different race of people, to register with the Federal Government so as to acquire “certificates of residence”; and (3) denied Chinese immigrants the proper to be released on bail upon utility for a writ of habeas corpus; Whereas, on an explicitly racial foundation, the Geary Act deemed the testimony of Chinese persons, including American residents of Chinese descent, per se inadequate to establish the residency of a Chinese person topic to deportation, mandating that such residence be established by way of the testimony of “a minimum of one credible white witness”; Whereas, in the 1894 Gresham-Yang Treaty, the Chinese authorities consented to a prohibition of Chinese immigration and the enforcement of the Geary Act in trade for the readmission of earlier Chinese residents; Whereas in 1898, the United States– (1) annexed Hawaii; (2) took control of the Philippines; and (3) excluded 1000’s of racially Chinese residents of Hawaii and of the Philippines from coming into the United States mainland; Whereas on April 29, 1902, Congress– (1) indefinitely extended all laws regulating and limiting Chinese immigration and residence; and (2) expressly applied such legal guidelines to United States insular territories, together with the Philippines; Whereas in 1904, after the Chinese government exercised its unilateral right to withdraw from the Gresham-Yang Treaty, Congress permanently extended, “with out modification, limitation, or condition”, all restrictions on Chinese immigration and naturalization, making the Chinese the only racial group explicitly singled out for immigration exclusion and permanently ineligible for American citizenship; Whereas between 1910 and 1940, the Angel Island Immigration Station applied the Chinese exclusion legal guidelines by– (1) confining Chinese persons for as much as practically 2 years; (2) interrogating Chinese persons; and (3) offering a mannequin for comparable immigration stations at other places on the Pacific coast and in Hawaii; Whereas every of the congressional debates regarding issues of Chinese civil rights, naturalization, and immigration concerned intensely racial rhetoric, with many Members of Congress claiming that every one persons of Chinese descent had been– (1) unworthy of American citizenship; (2) incapable of assimilation into American society; and (3) dangerous to the political and social integrity of the United States; Whereas the specific discrimination in these Federal statutes politically and racially stigmatized Chinese immigration into the United States, enshrining in law the exclusion of the Chinese from the political process and the promise of American freedom; Whereas wartime enemy forces used the anti-Chinese legislation passed in Congress as evidence of American racism in opposition to the Chinese, making an attempt to undermine the Chinese-American alliance and allied navy efforts; Whereas, in 1943, on the urging of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and over 60 years after the enactment of the primary discriminatory legal guidelines in opposition to Chinese immigrants, Congress– (1) repealed beforehand enacted anti-Chinese legislation; and (2) permitted Chinese immigrants to grow to be naturalized United States citizens; Whereas, despite going through decades of systematic, pervasive, and sustained discrimination, Chinese immigrants and Chinese-Americans persevered and have continued to play a big function in the expansion and success of the United States; Whereas 6 many years of Federal laws intentionally focusing on Chinese by race– (1) restricted the capacity of generations of individuals and families to openly pursue the American dream without concern; and (2) fostered an atmosphere of racial discrimination that deeply prejudiced the civil rights of Chinese immigrants; Whereas diversity is one of our Nation’s best strengths, and, while this Nation was founded on the precept that every one individuals are created equal, the laws enacted by Congress within the late nineteenth and early 20th centuries that restricted the political and civil rights of individuals of Chinese descent violated that precept; Whereas though an acknowledgment of the Senate’s actions that contributed to discrimination in opposition to individuals of Chinese descent will not erase the previous, such an expression will acknowledge and illuminate the injustices in our nationwide experience and assist to construct a better and stronger Nation; Whereas the Senate acknowledges the importance of addressing this unique framework of discriminatory laws so as to coach the general public and future generations relating to the affect of those laws on Chinese and different Asian individuals and their implications to all Americans; and Whereas the Senate deeply regrets the enactment of the Chinese Exclusion Act and related discriminatory legal guidelines that– (1) resulted within the persecution and political alienation of persons of Chinese descent; (2) unfairly restricted their civil rights; (3) legitimized racial discrimination; and (4) induced trauma that persists within the Chinese community: Now, subsequently, be it Resolved, That the Senate– (1) acknowledges that this framework of anti-Chinese legislation, together with the Chinese Exclusion Act, is incompatible with the fundamental founding ideas acknowledged within the Declaration of Independence that all persons are created equal; (2) acknowledges that this pattern of anti-Chinese legislation, including the Chinese Exclusion Act, is incompatible with the spirit of the United States Constitution; (3) deeply regrets passing 6 decades of legislation instantly concentrating on the Chinese folks for bodily and political exclusion and the wrongs dedicated in opposition to Chinese and American citizens of Chinese descent who suffered underneath these discriminatory legal guidelines; and (4) reaffirms its dedication to preserving the identical civil rights and constitutional protections for people of Chinese or other Asian descent within the United States accorded to all others, regardless of their race or ethnicity.
