Transforming Politics, Transforming America: The Political and Civic Incorporation of Immigrants in the United States

Rethinking Citizenship: Noncitizen Voting and Immigrant Political Engagement in the United States

In June 2003, the Office of the Inspector General in the Justice Department released a report documenting the treatment of post-9/11 detainees held in New York and New Jersey. The report found that both the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) made little distinction between detainees who were being held under suspicion of terrorist ties and those who happened to be captured as a result of FBI sweeps, and that detainees’ conditions were “excessively restrictive and unduly harsh.” The Inspector General’s December 2003 supplemental report focusing on allegations of prisoner abuse found that detainees were filmed during strip searches, verbally threatened, slammed against walls, hung by their restraints, and kept restrained for extended periods of time (Of- fice of the Inspector General 2003). Not excusing the behavior, the report makes reference to the heightened emotional atmosphere in the facility’s Brooklyn, New York, location and the fact that many of the guards had lost relatives in the 9/11 attacks. These behaviors point to a significant change in attitudes toward immigrants and immigrant rights that has occurred in the United States after 9/11. Thus, the movement in the United States has been toward restricting, rather than enhancing, immigrant political incorporation and rights. Yet, despite the growth in anti-immigrant rhetoric and limitations on immigrant rights, levels of legal immigration have not changed significantly since September 11, 2001. It is reasonable, therefore, to assume that the United States will remain home to a foreign-born population in significant numbers for the foreseeable future. Currently one in five Americans is either foreign born or the child of foreign-born parents. Given the relative size of the population, it is important that we consider how these immigrants are being incorporated into the U.S. polity . In particular, this essay considers the question of noncitizen poRethinking Citizenship Noncitizen Voting and Immigrant Political Engagement in the United States Lisa García Bedolla 52 Lisa García Bedolla litical incorporation. It begins with a historical look at noncitizen voting and an analysis of its legality. It then takes a theoretical look at the Lockean ideals underlying current attitudes toward immigrants and immigration. I argue that not only is the incorporation of legal permanent residents into the political system through voting and other forms of local participation constitutionally legal, but, given the large numbers of noncitizens currently living, working, and paying taxes in the United States, it also is necessary for the continued legitimacy of our democratic institutions. Noncitizen Voting in Historical Context Currently, noncitizen voting is the exception rather than the rule in the United States. However, for the bulk of American history, noncitizen voting was common at the local, state, and federal levels.1 During the nineteenth century, at least twenty-two states and territories had alien voting rights. During the colonial era, noncitizens voted and held public office throughout the colonies—a practice that was in opposition to established British policy.2 These policies were maintained after independence . As Gerald Rosberg points out, there was, in fact, “little effort in the latter part of the eighteenth century to declare specifically that only citizens could vote (Rosberg 1977, 1097). As such, “the line between national and state citizenship during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was not clearly demarcated, so those states that permitted noncitizen voting allowed it at all levels, local to national” (Harper-Ho 2000, 274). Thus, during the first few decades of U.S. history, race, property, and residence were the key criteria for voting rights, rather than citizenship . Most state constitutions referred to members of the political community as “inhabitants” rather than “citizens” (Rosberg 1977, 1097). This state of affairs changed during the early nineteenth century . States admitted into the union, such as Louisiana (1812), Indiana (1816), Mississippi (1817), Alabama (1819), Maine (1820), and Missouri (1821), all had constitutions that referred to citizens as voters (Rosberg 1977, 1097). Other states that had previously allowed noncitizen voting also moved to define voters as “citizens” rather than “inhabitants” in their new Constitutions.3 Some argue that these changes were the result of a growing national consciousness that came out of the war of 1812. Others suggest that it was a reaction both to the growth of non-English immigration during this period and to concerns about the “assimilability” of new immigrants (see Rosberg Rethinking Citizenship...