Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1566469)	10/19/2025 12:53:58 PM
From: Maple MAGA	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570321

"The Founding Fathers greatness put no restrictions on immigration." Really? What restrictions were in place early on Naturalization Act of 1790: Congress passed the first federal law governing how aliens could become U.S. citizens: an “Act to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization.” George Washington's Mount Vernon It required that the applicant be a “free white person” who had lived in the U.S. for at least two years (and at least one year in the state where applying) and be of good moral character. migrationpolicy.org+3Immigration History+3George Washington's Mount Vernon+3 The children under age 21 of a naturalized citizen would also become citizens. George Washington's Mount Vernon+1 It also defined children born abroad to U.S. citizen fathers as “natural-born” citizens. George Washington's Mount Vernon Essentially: the law focused on naturalization rather than immigration per se, and was limited to “free white persons.” Naturalization Act of 1795: This updated the 1790 act: required 3 years’ residence plus 5 years in U.S. (and 1 year in the state) before application. George Washington's Mount Vernon+2Howard Law Library+2 It required the applicant to renounce all foreign allegiances. George Washington's Mount Vernon No broad immigration-entry exclusion in those very early years: The early U.S. did not have a robust system of excluding immigrants from entering (or specifying many prohibited classes) until later in the 19th century. USCIS+2Hillsdale College+2 For example, aside from the naturalization laws, there wasn’t a large federal regime restricting who could immigrate in the 1790s and early 1800s. Cato Institute+1 Ideological attitudes of key figures: Some Founders expressed fairly open views toward immigration. For instance, Thomas Jefferson wrote that America “should not refuse to the unhappy fugitives from distress … that hospitality” which was offered to earlier settlers. The Washington Post+1 Scholars note that the Founding era “willingness to admit foreigners” is visible in the early laws. Hillsdale College+1 Important caveats and limitations The naturalization laws were restrictive in terms of race: only “free white persons” were eligible for citizenship in 1790. That excluded non-white immigrants. migrationpolicy.org+1 These laws regulated how immigrants could become citizens, not fully how many or which immigrants could enter the country. So the “immigration” restrictions were relatively light compared to later quotas and exclusion laws. The early regime left a lot of power to the states initially (immigration/naturalization issues) rather than a strong federal “immigration control” regime. Hillsdale College Summary In short: yes — the Founders and early Congress did pass laws that restricted certain aspects of immigration/naturalization (especially citizenship eligibility). But the restrictions were much narrower than what came later (e.g., large federal exclusion acts, racism-based quotas). The early policy was moderately open, especially in terms of welcoming immigrants, albeit with certain racial and residency qualification restrictions. If you like, I can check which Founders argued for or against immigration restrictions, and how the debates evolved in the early Republic. Would you like me to pull that together?