A Mixed Timeline
Event 1: Chinese Exclusion Act (1882)
Signed into law in 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was the first major restrictive law on immigration in the United States (“Chinese Exclusion Act”). The ten year act was extended in 1892 and made permanent in 1902 (“Chinese Exclusion Act”). Not only did the act restrict access into the U.S., but it further complicated the lives of those already living in the U.S., requiring them to obtain certifications that proved their residence or otherwise risk deportation (“Chinese Exclusion Act”). In 1943, with China as a U.S. ally in WWII, the act (and other restrictive immigrant acts) was repealed, but there were still quotas on the number of immigrants allowed in from each country (“Chinese Exclusion Act”).
Though well known, the Chinese Exclusion Act is integral to understanding the state of Chinese Americans today. The strict restrictions were based on the belief that the influx of Chinese immigrants was directly detrimental to national development–a racist belief set in law. This set the groundwork for anti-Asian (and anti-immigrant) sentiment in legislation and further restricted the lives of those who already emigrated.
Event 2: European Immigration in the 1900s in Minnesota
The 1800s was a time of exploration in the U.S. Many immigrants stayed on the coasts in cities such as New York or San Francisco, but many of the early settlers/immigrants moved further to the Midwest. Minnesota became a popular state of immigration, with 60% of the population in 1900 immigrants, primarily from nordic states (Ratsabout).
These immigrants include my own family. My great great grandparents immigrated from Germany, what was then Bohemia, and other countries in Western Europe. They settled in Minnesota and, through much strife, created families that still live on the same land to this day.
Event 3: Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965
This act was a major change in immigration policy, removing the strict quota system that was previously in place (“Immigration and Nationality Act”). Specifically, it created a program that attempted to allow more skilled workers to immigrate and also allowed for those already living in the U.S. to reunify families (“Immigration and Nationality Act”). The lawmakers did not predict how many people would take advantage of this family reunification, resulting in a boom in the population of non-European migrants, especially from Asia (“Immigration and Nationality Act”). This Act was a major step post-Chinese Exclusion Act in letting Asian immigrants into the U.S. (“Immigration and Nationality Act”). Though the Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed in 1943, it was not until the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 that many immigrants were able to actually come to the US.
In 1970, my dad immigrated to Maryland with his parents.
Event 4: Loving v. Virginia
This landmark case officially protected interracial marriage under the Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution (“Loving v. Virginia”). Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving, both Virginia residents, got married in D.C., but were arrested when they returned to Virginia as a married couple (“Loving v. Virginia”). They eventually took the case to the Supreme Court, which decided anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional (“Loving v. Virginia”)
While this is also a rather famous case, I want to emphasize the date associated with it. 1967 was not nearly as long ago as many would like to believe. Like many other shameful histories, it is popular to create a narrative that makes it seem like it was a different time period (Fusco 146-147), but there are generations that grew up without this protection. Despite the fact that the case was in the 60s, when color photography was increasingly becoming common in regular images, I struggled to find a color photograph of the couple. This furthers the idea that the case was farther in the past than it actually was.
Event 5: Respect for Marriage Act
The Respect for Marriage Act was specifically created to protect LGBT marriage rights in the U.S. after the landmark case that overturned Roe v. Wade (Radde). While the Act does not perfectly protect the right to same-sex marriage in the event that Obergefell v. Hodges is overturned (Radde), a more overlooked clause is the reinforced protection of Loving v. Virginia (“H.R.8404.”). The Act sought to ensure the protection of marriages that have historically been persecuted.
Conclusion
Many of these events are not directly related to each other. Even though the legislation on immigration policies connects Chinese and European movements in the country, there are significant differences between the policies adopted towards each respective group. What finitely connects these major events is my own existence. I sought to create a miniature history that explores how I came to exist–both in my parents' lives as well as the overarching history of the Chinese-American (in both senses of the words) experience. I seek to create a miniature archive such as the one Ana Patricia RodrÃguez created with the El Salvadoran community–not only a history but a story as well.
Furthermore, I haven’t done much exploration into my personal history. I have only just begun to ask questions related to my parent’s histories. I hope to achieve the first component of digital storytelling (as defined by Joe Lambert and Brooke Hessler) and learn more about myself through the development of this story. I see the beginnings of a story through the short narrative of major historical events that I listed for this project, and I hope to explore more in the future.
References:
“Chinese Exclusion Act (1882).” National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/chinese-exclusion-act. Accessed 17 Feb. 2023.
“H.R.8404.” Library of Congress. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404. Accessed 21 Feb 2023.
“Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.” History, Art, and Archives, United States House of Representatives. https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1951-2000/Immigration -and-Nationality-Act-of-1965/. Accessed 21 Feb. 2023.
Fusco, Coco. “The Other History of Intercultural Performance.” The MIT Press, vol. 68 no. 1,1994, pp 143-167.
Lambert, Joe and Brooke Hessler. “The World of Digital Storytelling.” Digital Storytelling, Routledge, 2018, pp 37-52.
Radde, Kaitlyn. “What does the Respect for Marriage Act do? The answer will vary by state.” National Public Radio, 8 Dec. 2022. https://www.npr.org/2022/12/08/1140808263/what-does-the-respect-for-marriage-act-do-the-answer-will-vary-by-state)
Ratsabout, Saengmany. “Immigrants and Refugees in Minnesota: Connecting Past and Present.” MNOPEDIA. Minnesota Historical Society, 18 Dec. 2018, https://www.mnopedia.org/immigrants-and-refugees-minnesota-connecting-past-and-present). Accessed 17 Feb. 2023.
“Richard Perry LOVING et ux., Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA.” Legal Information Institute of Cornell, https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1. Accessed 21 Feb. 2023
RodrÃguez, Ana Patricia. “‘Entre Mundos/Between Two Worlds:’ Digital Stories of Salvadoran Transnational Migration.” Letras Hispanas, vol. 11, 2015, pp 326-336.