{"title":"《美国公民身份:对当今事件的历史评价》","authors":"Jr Moore","doi":"10.22439/ASCA.V50I1.5693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In late 2015, debate among many US Republican presidential candidates focused on immigration policy, with one candidate who was hostile to America’s immigration policy, opining that the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship may be unconstitutional. This was the view of the GOP candidate who eventually won the Presidency. The question of citizenship, and the linked issue of rights, was contested in the early republic. Much of the quarrel revolved around the issue of slavery. At least three competing notions of citizenship and rights gained traction by the first half of the 19th century: one argued for citizenship and rights only for whites; another urged that “popular sovereignty” should determine rights and citizenship. A third insisted on an inclusive definition of citizenship. By 1868, the 14th Amendment underscored the latter view. But, as current affairs in America show, the bickering persists, often using arguments similar to those found in the early republic’s squabbles. This essay explores the debate among the viewpoints articulated during the first half of the 19th century and seeks to draw out counsel for our own time.","PeriodicalId":40729,"journal":{"name":"AMERICAN STUDIES IN SCANDINAVIA","volume":"50 1","pages":"51-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Citizenship in the United States: A Historical Assessment of a Present-Day Contretemps\",\"authors\":\"Jr Moore\",\"doi\":\"10.22439/ASCA.V50I1.5693\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In late 2015, debate among many US Republican presidential candidates focused on immigration policy, with one candidate who was hostile to America’s immigration policy, opining that the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship may be unconstitutional. This was the view of the GOP candidate who eventually won the Presidency. The question of citizenship, and the linked issue of rights, was contested in the early republic. Much of the quarrel revolved around the issue of slavery. At least three competing notions of citizenship and rights gained traction by the first half of the 19th century: one argued for citizenship and rights only for whites; another urged that “popular sovereignty” should determine rights and citizenship. A third insisted on an inclusive definition of citizenship. By 1868, the 14th Amendment underscored the latter view. But, as current affairs in America show, the bickering persists, often using arguments similar to those found in the early republic’s squabbles. This essay explores the debate among the viewpoints articulated during the first half of the 19th century and seeks to draw out counsel for our own time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AMERICAN STUDIES IN SCANDINAVIA\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"51-61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AMERICAN STUDIES IN SCANDINAVIA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22439/ASCA.V50I1.5693\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMERICAN STUDIES IN SCANDINAVIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22439/ASCA.V50I1.5693","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Citizenship in the United States: A Historical Assessment of a Present-Day Contretemps
In late 2015, debate among many US Republican presidential candidates focused on immigration policy, with one candidate who was hostile to America’s immigration policy, opining that the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship may be unconstitutional. This was the view of the GOP candidate who eventually won the Presidency. The question of citizenship, and the linked issue of rights, was contested in the early republic. Much of the quarrel revolved around the issue of slavery. At least three competing notions of citizenship and rights gained traction by the first half of the 19th century: one argued for citizenship and rights only for whites; another urged that “popular sovereignty” should determine rights and citizenship. A third insisted on an inclusive definition of citizenship. By 1868, the 14th Amendment underscored the latter view. But, as current affairs in America show, the bickering persists, often using arguments similar to those found in the early republic’s squabbles. This essay explores the debate among the viewpoints articulated during the first half of the 19th century and seeks to draw out counsel for our own time.
期刊介绍:
American Studies in Scandinavia, the journal of the Nordic Association for American Studies, is published twice each year, and carries scholarly articles and reviews on a wide range of American Studies topics and disciplines, including history, literature, politics, geography, media, language, diplomacy, race, ethnicity, economics, law, culture and society. American Studies in Scandinavia is sponsored by the National Councils for Research in Science and the Humanities in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, the journal is published by Odense University Press with the financial support of the Nordic Publications Committee for Humanist Periodicals.