Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump Immigration Actions Are Only Latest in White Supremacy Tradition

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services envelope
Honor migrants’ quest for a better life
Evgenia Parajanian/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled recently that Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia must be released and returned to his family. He was wrongfully deported to the high-security prison in El Salvador based on what the Trump administration calls an “administrative error.”

However, during a recent visit to the Oval Office with President Donald Trump, El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele stated that he will not return Abrego Garcia, echoing sentiments expressed by Trump and his administration.


This is a rare moment of a U.S. president openly defying a Supreme Court order. But, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s actions – such as claiming immigrants do not deserve due process as well as the targeting of documented, legal residents and international students – are not unprecedented at all.

Rather, this is just the latest chapter in a white supremacist history of immigration and citizenship in the U.S., which is disinformation at its worst because America has never been just a white country. Racist attempts throughout U.S. history to declare white supremacy as triumphant have all ultimately failed.

This is even as federal websites are scraped of mentions of diverse leaders, Black history books have been banned, and recently, the U.S. Naval Academy banned close to 400 books of history that violate orders to remove mentions of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Schools, universities, and colleges face significant funding cuts if they do not discontinue their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies and curricula.

Yet despite this recorded factual history, many Americans still believe that this country has historically been white. This may be stating the obvious, but Black and indigenous groups have been a part of this country’s cultural fabric for centuries longer than whites. But even that is not the full story.

While Hispanic and Asian groups are often characterized as newcomers to this country, members of such ethnic and racial groups have been on American soil for centuries, some with roots as far back as the 1600s.

During the westward expansion of the U.S. following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, a large number of indigenous, Hispanic, and Asian residents of that land became “American” not because they came to America, but because America came to them.

It feels ridiculous to remind people that the story of immigration to America is not just the story of Europeans coming across the Atlantic, but also groups who went across the Pacific or through the Caribbean, many of whom were Asian, Hispanic, or African.

As described in the 2024 book "Diversity in America"by Vincent Parillo and the 2022 book "Almost All Aliens: Immigration, Race, and Colonialism in American History and Identity"by Paul Spickard and colleagues, America has never been a country dominated by whites.

Prior to the Revolutionary War and for much of America’s early history, Federal immigration laws were relatively loose, particularly for European immigrant groups in the 1700s and 1800s.

For many European families that arrived through Ellis Island, paperwork such as visas, permits, and green cards was often nonexistent. But over time, racist laws and immigration quotas specifically targeted non-white groups’ arrival to America while leaving Europeans a relatively easier pathway to immigration.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 explicitly stated that only a “free white person” could become a citizen. This was followed by laws such as the Naturalization Act of 1870, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the Emergency Quota Act of 1921, and the Immigration Act of 1924, all of which placed restrictions on immigrants from non-white countries.

Explicit racism defined America’s immigration policies until the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, the first policy that removed rather than instated racial barriers in immigration.

Whiteness has been central in determining who could become a citizen and a full-fledged member of American society. Native Americans were barred from full citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, and Black Americans did not gain equal citizenship and legal rights until after the Civil Rights movement.

Then, non-white immigrants who met the standards of legality and time of residence were barred from citizenship. In the cases Ozawa vs United States (1922) and Thind vs United States (1923), the Supreme Court ruled that Japanese and Indian immigrants could not become naturalized citizens because they did not meet the standards of “white.”

Notably, the court applied inconsistent logic across these cases in the service of protecting these racist standards.

As Reece Jones describes in the 2022 book White Borders, punitive immigration law and citizenship restrictions have historically been tied to protecting white supremacy. This history is paralleled today; anti-immigration members of the White House administrations such as Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller have described immigration as a “great replacement” which threatens a “white genocide.”

Today, while explicitly racist laws regarding immigration and citizenship have been relegated to history, inequalities remain. Research shows that there are tangible differences in the naturalization acceptance of different immigrant groups, with non-white and Hispanic applicants being less likely to be approved than white applicants.

Additionally, the odds of being approved for citizenship drop significantly for immigrants in majority-white counties.

To be sure, Americans today are not responsible for the racist sins of the country’s past. Still, much of the current discourse that supports the current administration’s treatment of immigrants is rooted in claims such as, “My family came here the right way!” or “This has always been a white country!”

Here is a reminder that the U.S. has been very diverse for centuries, but non-whites were barred from equal immigration laws and fully participating in U.S. democracy as citizens. The actions of the current administration are certainly shocking, but it is only the latest chapter of historical and ongoing white supremacy in immigration and citizenship.

It is time to stop the ongoing white dominant narrative and close the book on racism in this country for good.

Dr. Neeraj Rajaseka r is an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Illinois-Springfield and a Public Voices Fellow with The OpEd Project.



Read More

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

Charles De Ketelaere #17 of Belgium scores his team’s first goal past Unai Simon #23 of Spain during the FIFA World Cup 2026 Quarter Final match between Spain and Belgium at Los Angeles Stadium on July 10, 2026, in Inglewood, California.

(Photo by David Ramos/Getty Images)

What the World Cup Teaches Us About Democracy

As live sporting events go, nothing comes close to the World Cup. I was in the stands when South Africa, my birth country, hosted the event in 2010 after decades of exclusion from global athletics. In June of this year, I had a full-circle moment when South Africa played in the knockout rounds for the first time, and I stood with my two American sons, arms around them, singing South Africa's anthem — the only national anthem that weaves multiple languages into a single, unifying song. Later in the week, I was in the stands again, cheering Spain's win over Austria, a country to which my only connections are a brief holiday…and the fact that my mother's family fled from there during the Inquisition.

The magic of the World Cup is that everyone in the stands wears the flags and shirts of countries that are “theirs” in some way. For some, it’s where they were born; for others, where they live or where their ancestors hailed from. For some, it is simply a country they have adopted for the afternoon. It is impossible to know how deep a person’s connection runs simply by looking at them. And next to a person waving one team’s colors is a stranger, family member, or close friend supporting the opposing team—or wearing the jersey of a team that isn’t playing that day at all.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose together.

Former President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, former President George W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton pose ahead of the dedication ceremony for the opening of the Barack Obama Presidential Center, in John Lewis Plaza, on June 18, 2026, in Chicago, Illinois.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais - Pool / Getty Images

America Shouldn't Need a Political Savior to Hold It Together

America is waiting for a political savior, but the problem is structural.

This dynamic was illustrated during two recent broadcast appearances by journalist Katy Tur. Discussing modern secessionist movements on June 15, 2026, Tur found optimism in a poll showing 54 percent of Americans still believe we share core values, and she later expressed hope that future leaders could reunite the country.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitution of the United State with the U.S. flag in the background.

The Framers designed a republic with the intention to manage factionalism through deliberate compromise and institutional guardrails, whereas 21st-century polarization often treats compromise as a moral failing.

Douglas Sacha, Getty Images

Our Framers on 21st Century Primaries and Polarization

The Framers would view 21st-century closed primaries and political polarization as the exact manifestation of "factionalism" they spent the 1787 Constitutional Convention trying to prevent. They would argue these systems force candidates to appeal to ideological extremes rather than the broad, moderate consensus required for stable governance.

The Danger of Factionalism: In Federalist No. 10, James Madison defined a "faction" as a group of citizens united by a passion or interest adverse to the rights of others. He argued that while factions are inevitable, their effects must be controlled. The Framers would recognize 21st-century hyper-polarization as the dominance of unyielding factions that prioritize absolute ideological purity over democratic compromise.

Keep ReadingShow less