Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "68866136",
    "label": "Statement by President Harry S. Truman, Veto of Bill to Revise the Laws Relating to Immigration, Naturalization, and Nationality",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68866136"
}

{
    "id": "68866136",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68866136",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Statement by President Harry S. Truman, Veto of Bill to Revise the Laws Relating to Immigration, Naturalization, and Nationality",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68866136",
    "collections": [
        "President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
        "Press Release Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/602185/875649-35-01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/602185/875649-35-01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/602185/875649-35-01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 8,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/68866136",
    "naId": 68866136,
    "levelOfDescription": "item",
    "productionDates": [
        {
            "day": 25,
            "logicalDate": "1952-06-25",
            "month": 6,
            "year": 1952
        }
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 6,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/602185/875649-35-06.jpg",
    "mediaId": "6849825869d03004",
    "ocrText": "6 -\ncases where it is now available, and would narrow the circle of those\nwho can obtain relief from the letter of the law. This is most un-\nfortunate, because the bill, in its other provisions, would impose\nharsher restrictions and greatly increase the number of cases deserving\nequitable relief.\nNative-born American citizens who are dual nationals would be\nsubjected to loss of citizenship on grounds not applicable to other\nnative-born American citizens. This distinction is a slap at millions\nof Americans whose fathers were of alien birth.\nChildren would be subjected to additional risk of loss of\ncitizenship. Naturalized citizens would be subjected to the risk of\ndenaturalization by any proceuure that can be found to be permitted\nunder any State law or practice pertaining to minor civil law suits.\nJudicial review of administrative denials of citizenship would be\nseverely limited and impeded in many cases, and completely eliminated\nin others. I believe these provisions raise serious constitutional\nquestions. Constitutionality aside, I see no justification in national\npolicy for their adoption.\nSection 401 of this bill would establish a Joint Congressional\nCommittee on Immigration and Nationality Policy. This committee would\nhave the customary powers to hold hearings and to subpoena witnesses,\nbooks, papers and documents. But the Committee would also be given\npowers over the Executive branch which are unusual and of a highly\nquestionable nature. Specifically, section 401 would provide that \"The\nSecretary of State and the Attorney General shall without delay submit to\nthe Committee all regulations, instructions, and all other information as\nrequested by the Committee relative to the administration of this Act. \"\nThis section appears to be another attempt to require the\nExecutive branch to make available to the Congress administrative docu-\nments, communications between the President and his subordinates, confi-\ndential files, and other records of that character. It also seems to\nimply that the Committee would undertake to supervise or approve regula-\ntions. Such proposals are not consistent ith the Constitutional doctrine\nof the separation of powers.\nIn these and many other respects, the bill raises basic ques-\ntions as to our fundamental immigration and naturalization policy, and\nthe laws and practices for putting that policy into effect.\nMany of the aspects of the bill which have been most widely\ncriticized in the public debate are reaffirmations or elaborations of\nexisting statutes or administrative procedures. Time and again, ex-\namination discloses that the revisions of existing law that would be\nmade by the bill are intended to solidify some restrictive practice\nof our immigration authorities, or to overrule or modify some amelio-\nrative decision of the Supreme Court or other Federal courts. By and\nlarge, the changes that would be made by the bill do not depart from\nthe basically restrictive spirit of our existing laws but intensify\nand reinforce it.\nThese conclusions point to an underlying condition which de-\nserves the most careful study. Should We not undertake a reassessment\nof our immigration policies and practices in the light of the conditions\nthat face us in the second half of the twentieth century? The great\npopular interest which this bill has created, and the criticism which\nit has stirred up, demand an affirmative answer. I hope the Congress\nwill agree to a careful reexamination of this entire matter.\nTo assist in this complex task, I suggest the creation of a\nrepresentative commission of outstanding Americans to examine the basic\nassumptions of our immigration policy, the quota system and all that\ngoes with it, the effect of our present immigration and nationality\nlaws, their administration, and the ways in which they can be brought\ninto line with our national ideals and our foreign policy."
}