Copies of Smith's paper were distributed before the lecture, but he began with a short summary of his discussion. "The argument of this paper is that we're seeing … a convergence of the rights of citizens and the rights of aliens, but a convergence in the direction of pushing both to the lowest levels, to the level of the rights of enemy combatants," he said. He also argued that since the early 1990s, the government has used the fear of aliens to pass laws that limit rights for both aliens and citizens.
Smith traced the evolution of this legal precedent through history, beginning in the late 19th century, where he claims that U.S. fear of aliens began. Before this time, he argued, the U.S. encouraged immigration, though mostly looking for immigrants from Western Europe. Smith noted that shortly after this time, there was a creation of immigration laws that restricted the entrance of immigrants, particularly non-white immigrants.
He next focused on Japanese internment in the 1940s as a manifestation of fear of aliens. He argued that the Korematsu v. United States court case set a precedent for the use of racial exclusion in the name of national security interests which has not been overturned to this day. Smith claimed that for a time there was a general increase in rights, particularly in the 1960s, which continued until the late 1980s. However, he argued that soon, new laws passed, restricting immigration and limiting the rights of both aliens and citizens.
Smith focused on laws passed since 2001, which he saw as a "heightening of a pattern first seen in the early 1990s." "I regard some of these changes as necessary," he said. He also argued that the government was right to look at immigration as a possible law enforcement issue. However, he expressed concern with the increased power of the administration in dealing with people declared to be "unlawful enemy combatants" or material witnesses to terrorism. He was especially concerned that U.S. citizens could potentially fall into either of these categories and lose all of the rights associated with their citizenship.
The lecture was followed by a discussion with Smith answering questions from both students and faculty. In one question, Professor of Political Science and Women's and Gender Studies Amrita Basu asked Smith, "What is the political capital to be gained by linking the rights of citizens and aliens?" Smith responded by saying that he believes that modern politics represent a reaction to the "rights revolution" of the 60s and 70s, and that there is a powerful movement to roll back what some see as an excess of rights.
Both students and faculty who attended came away impressed with the lecture and even more impressed with the discussion that followed. "Professor Smith was very responsive to questions," said Shannon Dobson '06.
James Laff '09 agreed with Dobson. "I thought the discussion was far more fruitful than the lecture, primarily because he was more opinionated when he had to think on his feet," he said.
Students and faculty learned a variety of important points from the lecture. "I came away from Professor Smith's lecture with some new insight about the implications of history and race on the nature of citizenship," said Laff. "The idea of citizenship is obviously evolving, and Professor Smith laid out a new way of looking at it," Dobson added.
Professor of Political Science and LJST Austin Sarat made another observation about Smith's take on citizenship. "He showed how states can make citizenship into an empty category and make us all into aliens," he said.
Students and faculty also left with new insights into contemporary political events. "Our laws are not as clean as we assume they are," said Dobson. "We have, and do now, passed laws based on race, and that adds to a xenophobic atmosphere."
Visiting Assistant Professor of Political Science Sayres Rudy felt that Smith's ideas echoed many others who were calling into question the curtailing of rights in America. "In an eloquent, detailed presentation, Rogers Smith has joined many activists, lawyers and scholars in demonstrating that citizen and immigrant rights are both eroding and blending," he said. "But more importantly, that there is potentially no legal or social limit to the creeping authoritarian suppression of rights in the American political system."
Sarat thought that the lecture was central to the ideas being discussed in the "Law and the Stranger" series, which will continue in the spring semester.