The Reconstructionist Weekly: Chinese Exclusion Act & Trump's New Policies

Much of The Reconstructionist focuses on Barrett Holmes Pitner’s theory of the American Cycle which helps explain how and why America’s current political crisis mirrors the aftermath of the collapse of Reconstruction in 1877.

As President Donald Trump aggressively implements his regressive agenda, the parallels between the past and the present have become abundant and unmistakable. To highlight these parallels, we will publish The Reconstructionist Weekly each Monday, summarizing the regressive policies that undermine our democracy and how they mirror the past.

Also, this Wednesday, March 5, at 1 pm, the Reconstructionism Project of the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights will be hosting a free webinar titled The Importance of Teaching Reconstruction and the Law Today. This will be a great opportunity for learning more about the parallels between the past and the present, and how we can make a more equitable, just, and free America. You can register for the free event here. 

Then → During Reconstruction, Chinese immigrants became targets of growing hostility and discrimination. Initially welcomed as laborers, particularly for the transcontinental railroad, Chinese workers were viewed as an essential part of westward expansion. The Burlingame-Seward Treaty of 1868 facilitated this migration by allowing an unrestricted flow of Chinese immigrants into the country.

Also, Reconstruction created a need for Chinese immigrants because the South’s defeat in the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation prevented the expansion of slavery into the western territories and abolished slavery in the United States. In the absence of an enslaved population, immigrants were needed for the labor of westward expansion.

However, after the Financial Panic of 1873,—which occurred after the closing of banking firm Jay Cooke & Company triggered the bankruptcy of 89 of the 364 railroads in the United States—Chinese immigrants became convenient scapegoats. Unemployment had risen to 14% by 1876 and Chinese immigrants were blamed for poor wages and taking jobs from American workers, particularly in Western states like California. This xenophobic sentiment erupted into violence during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, when anti-Chinese riots broke out in San Francisco. Subsequently, the Workingmen’s Party of California emerged with a platform centered on halting Chinese immigration. Its famous slogan was, “The Chinese must go.”

Responding to mounting pressure, Congress passed the “Fifteen Passenger Bill” in 1879, designed to limit Chinese arrivals at U.S. ports. Post-Reconstruction-era President Rutherford B. Hayes vetoed this legislation as it violated the Burlingame-Seward Treaty. Hayes faced strong criticism in the West and this decision nearly led to an impeachment attempt against him.

In 1880, the United States entered an agreement with China known as the Angell Treaty, which allowed the United States to limit Chinese immigration. This paved the way for the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, signed into law by Republican President Chester Arthur. The act prohibited Chinese immigration for ten years and denied U.S. citizenship to Chinese immigrants. It marked the first significant federal law restricting immigration based on nationality and ethnicity. 

From then on, the exclusionary policies directed at Chinese immigrants were only extended and strengthened. The Scott Act of 1888, signed by President Grover Cleveland, prevented Chinese immigrants who had left the United States from returning, even if they had established homes and businesses here. These policies isolated approximately 250,000 Chinese immigrants already in the country, most of whom lived in California working as farmers and laborers. 

---

Now → Since beginning his second term, Trump has continued to intensify his anti-immigration agenda, using his executive authority to implement sweeping restrictions reminiscent of the Chinese Exclusion era during Redemption/Regression. Trump has signed several immigration-related executive orders since January, portraying immigrants as both economic threats and security risks to American citizens.

Executive Order, “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” has established “enhanced vetting” procedures for visa applicants and immigrants already in the country. This has created significant delays and barriers for individuals seeking to enter the United States, particularly those from countries the administration has deemed “high-risk.” This parallels the discrimination Chinese immigrants faced during Redemption/Regression, when they were collectively viewed with suspicion regardless of individual circumstances. 

Two other executive orders, “Securing Our Borders,” and “Declaring a National Emergency at the Southern Border of the United States,” have directed military resources toward immigration enforcement and ended humanitarian programs that provided pathways to citizenship for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The Trump administration has consistently labeled immigration into the United States as an “invasion” and has framed immigrants as the primary cause of economic challenges facing American workers, echoing the xenophobic rhetoric used to justify legislation like the Chinese Exclusion Act. 

At a Pennsylvania rally in 2024, Trump said, “You have an invasion of people into our country. They’re going to be attacking—and they already are—Black population jobs, the Hispanic population jobs, and they’re attacking union jobs too,” Trump said. “So when you see the border, it’s not just the crime. Your jobs are being taken away too.”

Trump’s claims, which have been debunked, directly mirror the allegations that Chinese immigrants were depressing wages and displacing American workers in the late 1800s. 

Just like the era of Redemption/Regression, today’s move toward exclusionary policies represents an abandonment of the progress made during Reconstruction in favor of a nativist vision that scapegoats foreign-born and non-white residents for complex economic and social challenges. Under this view, any person who is perceived as “non-American” can be seen as the “other,” a threat to our nation’s safety and economy. Trump’s divisive rhetoric amplifies this idea and creates a narrative that an entire race or group of people is ”bad,” or detrimental to American safety and security.” 

As we know, Trump excels at branding, and by perpetuating the idea that immigrants are “bad” and certain Americans, essentially the Americans who support him, are “good,” he brands himself as the person who will get rid of the “bad” and effectively solve all of America’s problems. 

The parallel is clear. Once again, a period of progress toward greater inclusion has been followed by a reactionary backlash that targets immigrants and people of color as the source of America's problems rather than acknowledging their contributions to its prosperity and how demonizing the other will destroy our democracy.