At their core, three of the four Alien and Sedition Acts assume that the biggest problem is immigrants, and one thinks the problem is people who believe different things.
Though the laws were written at a time when they were worried about French immigrants, they can easily be repurposed into whatever ethnic or religious minority happens to be coming over in numbers.
The unspoken assumption at the heart of the laws is that all this immigration is a negative thing. That without special laws policing these people, they're going to do something terrible. They're being judged for something they haven't done yet, or might never do.
Questions About Prejudice
- Is prejudice always negative? Can you think of an example where it might be a good thing? Or should all forms of prejudice be done away with? Why or why not?
- Should there be a different set of laws policing immigrants and foreign residents that there are for natural-born citizens? What kinds of laws? What kinds of differences?
- How has prejudice changed over the years? Is it more damaging when it is encoded into laws, or are more subtle forms of discrimination worse because they can be ignored?
- Are any sections of the Alien and Sedition Acts a good idea? Which parts and why?
Chew on This
The Alien and Sedition Acts helped codify a specific kind of prejudice into American law, and the promise of the Declaration of Independence cannot be fulfilled until the Alien Enemies Act is repealed.
Prejudice is most often used in a negative manner, but it can be merely an aspect of learning. While irrational aspects of prejudice should be avoided, the rational aspects should not be lost.