Takao Ozawa v. United States
1922 U.S. LEXIS 2357, 260 U.S. 178, 43 S. Ct. 65 (1922)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The Naturalization Act of 1906 is limited by the racial eligibility requirements of Revised Statutes § 2169, which restricts naturalization to 'free white persons' and persons of African nativity or descent. The term 'white person' is synonymous with a person of the Caucasian race and excludes individuals of the Japanese race.
Facts:
- Takao Ozawa was a person of the Japanese race, born in Japan.
- Ozawa had resided continuously in the United States, including Hawaii, for twenty years.
- He was a graduate of Berkeley High School in California and had been a student at the University of California for nearly three years.
- Ozawa educated his children in American schools, his family attended American churches, and he maintained the use of the English language in his home.
- The U.S. government conceded that Ozawa was well-qualified for citizenship by character and education.
Procedural Posture:
- On October 16, 1914, Takao Ozawa filed a petition for naturalization in the U.S. District Court for the Territory of Hawaii.
- The United States District Attorney for the District of Hawaii opposed the petition.
- The District Court, a court of first instance, denied Ozawa's petition, holding that he was racially ineligible for naturalization under § 2169 of the Revised Statutes.
- Ozawa, as appellant, appealed the decision to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, an intermediate appellate court.
- The Circuit Court of Appeals certified three questions of law to the U.S. Supreme Court for instruction.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a person of the Japanese race, born in Japan, qualify as a 'free white person' under Revised Statutes § 2169 and is therefore eligible for naturalization in the United States?
Opinions:
Majority - Mr. Justice Sutherland
No. A person of the Japanese race does not qualify as a 'free white person' under the naturalization statutes. First, the Naturalization Act of 1906, which primarily addresses procedural matters, did not implicitly repeal the substantive racial restrictions of Revised Statutes § 2169. It is inconceivable that Congress would have abandoned a foundational, century-old policy on racial eligibility in such a 'dubious and casual fashion.' Second, the phrase 'free white persons' must be interpreted according to its common, popular meaning, not by scientific or ethnological definitions. Based on a long line of judicial precedent and legislative acquiescence, the term 'white person' is synonymous with a person of the Caucasian race. Since the appellant is of the Japanese race and not Caucasian, he is not eligible for naturalization, regardless of his personal character or assimilation into American culture.
Analysis:
This decision solidified a racially exclusionary interpretation of U.S. naturalization law, establishing the 'common knowledge' or popular understanding of race as the legal standard for determining who qualified as 'white.' The Court's reasoning rendered an individual's cultural assimilation, education, and character irrelevant in the face of racial ineligibility. This precedent, along with United States v. Thind (1923), legally barred most Asian immigrants from obtaining citizenship until the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 finally eliminated racial qualifications for naturalization.
