United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind

United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Bhagat Singh Thind , an Indian Sikh man who identified himself as an Aryan , was ineligible for naturalized citizenship in the United States . In 1919, Thind filed a petition for naturalization under the Naturalization Act of 1906 which allowed only "free white persons" and "aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent " to become United States citizens by naturalization.

After his petition was granted, government attorneys initiated a proceeding to cancel Thind's naturalization and a trial followed in which the government presented evidence of Thind's political activities as a founding member of the Ghadar Party , an Indian independence movement headquartered in San Francisco .

Thind did not challenge the constitutionality of the racial restrictions. Instead, he attempted to be classified as a "free white person" within the meaning of the Naturalization Act based on the fact that Indians and Europeans share common descent from Proto-Indo-Europeans .

Thind was represented by a fellow Indian American , Sakharam Ganesh Pandit , a California attorney.

The Court unanimously rejected Thind's argument, adding that Thind did not meet a "common sense" definition of white , ruling that Thind could not become a naturalized citizen. The Court concluded that "the term 'Aryan' has to do with linguistic, and not at all with physical characteristics, and it would seem reasonably clear that mere resemblance in language, indicating a common linguistic root buried in remotely ancient soil, is altogether inadequate to prove common racial origin."

Contents

• 1 Background

• 2 Argument

• 3 Supreme Court decision

• 4 Aftermath

• 5 See also

• 6 References

• 7 External links

Background

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Background")

Bhagat Singh Thind had come to the United States in 1913 for higher studies after obtaining a bachelor's degree in India. He enlisted in the United States Army , became a Sergeant and served in World War I . He was discharged honorably with his character designated as "excellent". Thind was granted citizenship in the state of Washington in July 1918 but his citizenship was rescinded in just four days. Thind then applied for citizenship a second time while working in Oregon on May 6, 1919. He received his citizenship in the state of Oregon in November 1920 after the Bureau of Naturalization was unsuccessful in its efforts to stall it in Oregon court. The case then reached the Supreme Court, where Sakharam Ganesh Pandit , a California attorney and fellow immigrant, represented Thind.

Argument

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Argument")

Thind argued that Indo-Aryan languages are indigenous to the Aryan part of India in the same way that Aryan languages are indigenous to Europe, highlighting the linguistic ties between Indo-Aryan speakers and Europeans, as most European languages including English are similar to Indo-Aryan languages such as Hindi .

Three months earlier, the _Ozawa v. United States _ court case had decided that the meaning of white people for the purposes of the Court were people who were members of the Caucasian race . With this in mind, Thind argued that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race. Thind argued using "a number of anthropological texts" that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the "Aryan race", and Thind cited scientific authorities such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach as classifying Aryans as belonging to the Caucasian race. Thind argued that, although some racial mixing did indeed occur between the Indian castes, the caste system had largely succeeded in India at preventing race-mixing. Thind argued that by being a "high-caste, of full Indian blood" he was a "Caucasian" according to the anthropological definitions of his day.

Thind's lawyers argued that Thind had a revulsion to marrying an Indian woman of the "lower races" when they said, "The high-caste Hindu regards the aboriginal Indian Mongoloid in the same manner as the American regards the Negro , speaking from a matrimonial standpoint." Thind's lawyers argued that Thind had a revulsion to marrying a woman of the Mongoloid race. This would characterize Thind as being both white and someone who would be sympathetic to the existing anti-miscegenation laws in the United States .

Supreme Court decision

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: Supreme Court decision")

Associate Justice George Sutherland said that authorities on the subject of race were in disagreement over which people were included in the scientific definition of the Caucasian race, so Sutherland instead chose to rely on the common understanding of race rather than the scientific understanding of race. Sutherland found that, while Thind may claim to have "purity of Aryan blood" due to being "born in Village Taragarh Talawa near Jandiala Guru, Amritsar , Punjab ", he was not Caucasian in the "common understanding", so he could not be included in the "statutory category as white persons".

The Court reiterated its holding in _Ozawa v. United States _, explaining that the words "free white person" in the naturalization act were "synonymous with the word 'Caucasian' only as that word is popularly understood," pointing out that the statutory language was to be interpreted as "words of common speech and not of scientific origin, ... written in the common speech, for common understanding, by unscientific men." Justice Sutherland wrote in his summary:

The eligibility of this applicant for citizenship is based on the sole fact that he is of high caste Hindu stock, born in village Taragarh Talawa , Amritsar district, [Punjab](https://en.wiki

…