Jasmine Singh

\\server05\productn\U\UAA\14-1\UAA102.txt unknown Seq: 1 3-SEP-09 13:33

“Everything I’m Not Made Me Everything I am”:The Racialization of Sikhs in the United States

Jasmine K. Singh*

INTRODUCTION

My great uncle, Rala Singh, was among the first Asian Indians to settleand live in the state of Arizona. In 1927, he left Punjab, India hoping tostart a new life in the United States. After entering the United Statesthrough Oregon, he traveled to Michigan and then to Arizona, with dreamsof owning and farming his own land. Due to alien land laws, however, hewas prohibited from such ownership.1 Somehow unbarred by anti-miscege-nation laws, he married a white woman who purchased land under hername. That land, later named Rala Farms, became a staple of Arizonaagriculture. It also facilitated the immigration of my mother, my father,and much of my extended family. The trials my great uncle faced are rep-resentative of those faced by many early Sikh immigrants. Sikhs werebarred from owning land, marrying, forming families, and living their livesfree from discrimination.

Sikhs in the United States have long endured a complicated and am-biguous racial status. Since the time of their earliest immigration to today,they have been stripped of their self-identity and “re-defined” by theracer.2 Sikhs have been essentialized as Hindus, marginalized, forgotten,and, in recent times, misidentified and demonized. Sikhs have experienceda unique3 process of racialization that has been largely unexplored. Racial-ization is a process that begins when individuals are first mapped into acertain group based on specific traits and characteristics, and then treatedin a specific manner based on the meanings attached to the assigned

* J.D University of California at Los Angeles, May 2008, Order of the Coif. B.A., Univer-sity of Michigan, December 2004, High Distinction. I first want to thank Professor Nanda andProfessor Kang for their guidance and mentorship. Without their ideas, feedback and support, Iwould not have been able to write this paper. I am forever indebted to the members of the SocialJustice Writing Circle and the War on Terror Reading Group. Thank you for your passion, com-ments, and criticisms. Thank you to the Critical Race Studies program at UCLA for supportingthese groups and for the amazing professors, advisors and students. I am blessed for having hadthe chance to work with them and learn from them. Thank you to the staff of APALJ for all oftheir careful work in editing this Note. To my family and friends, thank you for believing in me,encouraging me, and laughing with me. To MBT, KJ and LBC, thank you for empowering me.

1. See 1939 ARIZ. CODE ANN. §§ 70-201 (repealed by Laws 1978, Ch. 129 § 1).2. E. Christi Cunningham, The “Racing” Cause of Action and the Identity Formerly Known

as Race: The Road to Tamazunchale, 30 RUTGERS L.J. 707, 714 (1999). Racer refers to one indi-vidual who determines what racial category another individual will be placed into, id.

3. By proclaiming that the experience is unique, this Note does not intend to compare orcontrast the Sikh experience to that of other groups, but instead hopes to shed light on a racializa-tion process that has been largely unexplored.


2009] THE RACIALIZATION OF SIKHS IN THE UNITED STATES 55

group.4 Racialization “signifies the extension of racial meaning to a previ-ously unclassified relationship, social practice, or group.”5 Understandingand investigating the racialization of Sikhs can provide a “much neededand more complete understanding of the operation of White supremacy inthe subordination of each individual as well as all racialized groups.”6 Bytracing the racialization of Sikhs over three historical periods, this Noteendeavors to: (1) demonstrate the historical circumstances and events thatreflect and affect the racialization process, (2) discuss the various responsesof Sikhs to this process, (3) analyze the sources of these varied responses,and (4) judge the success of these responses in fighting subordination.

By going through those steps, this Note aims to show that the processof racialization is not one-directional. Instead, the actions and responses ofboth the “perceiver” (the one assigning the category) and the “target” (theone being categorized) are part of the racialization process. In addition,this Note aspires to illustrate that the target’s response to the perceiver’scategorization is informed by the existing racial hierarchy. In particular,the response is shaped by the target’s attempts to navigate that hierarchy inorder to secure access to certain rights and privileges.

A. A Brief History of the Sikh Religion and Community

Having knowledge of the Sikh community and the Sikh religion is im-portant for understanding the racialization of Sikhs. Sikhism is an indepen-dent, monotheistic religion centering on service, egalitarianism, andengagement in daily life. Sikhism was founded by Guru Nanak Dev Ji inthe fifteenth century in Northern India. Nine living successors (Gurus) fol-lowed Guru Nanak, guiding Sikh disciples and contributing to the develop-ment of the religion. The last Guru “bestowed the leadership position ofthe Guruship to the Sikhs themselves, collectively known as the GuruKhalsa Panth,”7 which takes its guidance from the Guru Granth Sahib (theHoly Scripture). The scripture itself acts as the current and final Guru.

In the 1600s, during the times of the middle and later Gurus, Sikhscame into conflict with Emperor Jahangir of the Mughal Empire, and facedreligious persecution.8 Jahangir’s son, Aurangzeb, escalated this tensionand demanded that all Sikhs either convert to Islam or be killed, thus initi-ating a period of violent conflict between the Mughal Empire and theSikhs. In 1675, Aurangzeb executed the ninth Sikh Guru, causing the Sikh

4. Eric K. Yamamoto, Rethinking Alliances: Agency, Responsibility and Interracial Justice, 3UCLA ASIAN PAC. AM. L.J. 33, 60 (1995) (quoting Michael Omi, Out of the Melting Pot and Intothe Fire: Race Relations Policy, in THE STATE OF ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICA: POLICY ISSUES TO

YEAR 2020, 199, 207 (1993)).5. Id.6. Paulette M. Caldwell, The Content of our Characterizations, 5 MICH. J. RACE & L. 53, 64

(1999).7. First Five Gurus — Growth of Sikhism, http://www.sikhism.com/origins/growth (last vis-

ited Feb. 2, 2009).8. See generally The Sikh Encyclopedia, http://www.thesikhencyclopedia.com/biographical/

muslims-rulers-and-sufi-saints/jahangir-nur-ljd-din-muhammad.html (last visited Dec. 20, 2007).


56 UCLA ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 14:54

religion to become increasingly militarized and politicized. To resistMughal rule, the tenth and final living Guru —Guru Gobind Singh— insti-tuted military order within the religion, the central part of which was thefounding of the Khalsa in 1699. The Khalsa is a community combiningreligious purposes with military duties and with its creation, came the crys-tallization of the Sikh identity. At the founding of the Khalsa, five markersof the Sikh identity were delineated, known as the Five Ks. They are: kesh(uncut hair which is typically covered by a turban), kanga (wooden comb),kachha (specially-designed underwear), kara (steel bracelet), and kirpan(strapped sword).9

Since the Sikh religion’s inception, Sikhs have been a minority groupin India and have warded off attempts at conversion and co-option.10 Co-option was a threat largely posed by Hindu nationalist groups claiming thatSikhism was a sect of the Hindu religion. Illustrative of these efforts waspropaganda distributed in the late 1800s by Hindu Nationalists claiming“Sikhs Hindus Hain” (Sikhs are Hindus). Popular Sikh response is illus-trated by a letter, written by Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, entitled “HumHindu Nahin” (We are not Hindu).11 Modern attempts at co-option in-clude: (1) popular media portraying Sikhism as a sect of Hinduism, or (2)mis-portraying the tenants of the Sikh religion generally. Attempts to es-

9. See generally Sikhism in 27 The New Encyclopædia Britannica 284-287 (EncyclopædiaBritannica, Inc. eds., 15th ed. 2003). Developed during a point of tension between Sikhs andMughals, these markers would help to bond members of the community together. BBC, Religion& Ethics-Sikhism, www.bbc.co.uk/religions/sikhism/customs/fiveks.shtml (last visited Mar. 3,2009). Note that there is some internal discord within the Sikh religion over whether those whohave not been initiated into the Khalsa, or taken “amrit,” and adopted the Five Ks, can truly becalled Sikh. Terms have been devised to distinguish those who have taken “amrit,” —Amritdhari— from those who have not — Sahajdhari. See Understanding Sikhism (The Gospelof the Gurus): Who Is A Sikh?, www.gurmat.info/sms/smspublications/understandingsikhismthegospelofthegurus/chapter2/ (last visited Mar. 3, 2009). This Note does not aim to define who aSikh is for religious purposes, but instead, it aims to speak to the experience of the group collec-tively. While those that keep unshorn hair (turban and beard) most definitely have experiencesthat are different from those who do not, this Note addresses Sikhs generally because first, thereis a collective understanding of the identity and second, because non-turban wearing Sikhs stillsuffer discrimination, although not for the exact same reasons. While conducting this Note in thisway essentializes the Sikh experience, such essentialism is useful to shed light on issues that are ofimportance to the community and that can contribute to a greater understanding of the trends ofracialization of immigrant communities. For an explanation of what has been called “strategicessentialism,” see GAYATRI SPIVAK, Subaltern Studies: Deconstructing Historiography, in IN

OTHER WORLDS 197, 205 (1988).10. By co-option, this Note means intentional and unintentional efforts by other groups to

bring Sikhism within the folds of their religions.11. Shri Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Sikh Relationship, http://www.curriculumunits.com/crucible/

hindu-sikh.html (last visited Feb. 23, 2009). Nabha was a celebrated Sikh scholar. He wrote“Hum Hindu Nahin” to argue that Sikhism was an “autonomous faith with its own history, relig-ious symbols, and philosophy.” See Hum Hindu Nahin, http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Hum_Hindu_Nahin (last visited Feb. 21, 2009). A more modern example is “clause (2)(b) of article 25of the Indian constitution, which [in 1984] define[d] Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains as Hindus.” Id. Inaddition, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 required that “a Sikh couple that marries in accordanceto the rites of the Sikh religion must register its marriage under [the Act] in order to be consid-ered legally married” and such a requirement “amounts to a coercive declaration that the coupleis Hindu.” Id.



tablish Sikhism as an independent religion in India in response to the co-option just discussed have no doubt also influenced the psyche of the SikhDiaspora.

The continuing tension between the Sikh minority and the Hindu ma-jority in India has also impacted the Sikh psyche. This tension partly mani-fested itself in what some refer to as the Sikh Genocide12 in 1984. Whilethe history surrounding the genocide is contested, most accounts view theoccupation of a Sikh temple by Sikh militants in Amritsar, Punjab, Indiaand the government’s controversial reaction to this occupation to be thecornerstones of the event.13 In June 1984, after tension between Sikhs mili-tants and government officials escalated, the central government engagedin “a massive offensive. . .against militants” in the temple and imposed acurfew and deployed the military throughout Punjab as part of the opera-tion.14 In October 1984, then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassi-nated by two Sikh bodyguards and “in the aftermath of her death,thousands of Sikhs were killed and tens of thousands displaced in targetedviolence.”15 Following these events, Sikh identity became even morepoliticized. Sikhs viewed themselves not only as a religious community, butalso as constituting a quasi nation-state with a separate national identityand loyalty, deserving of an independent Sikh nation.16 This history hasaffected Sikhs’ responses to their racialization over time and will help us tounderstand and analyze these various responses in context.

B. Roadmap

With this historical reality in mind, this Note analyzes the multi-fac-eted nature of the racialization of Sikhs in five different parts. In Part I,this Note starts by explaining the process of racial formation, borrowingfrom Professor Jerry Kang’s discussion of racial schemas.17 Kang’s modelsuggests that racial formation is crystallized at three main points: first, a“perceiver” uses certain mapping rules to understand an individual target;second, those rules help a “perceiver” place the target into a specific racialcategory; and third, meanings are attached to that category, thereby influ-

12. See generally SIKH GENOCIDE PROJECT, THE RISE OF AN ILLIBERAL DEMOCRACY IN

INDIA: A CASE-STUDY OF THE CRISIS IN PUNJAB, http://www.sikhgenocide.org/background.htm(last visited Feb. 23, 2009).

13. Id. Note that the temple that was occupied, known as the Golden Temple, is amongst themost important sites for Sikh pilgrimages. The day the government launched its offensive, whichwas coined Operation Bluestar, “coincide[d] with the martyrdom day of Guru Arjan, who hadconstructed [the temple].” Id. Thus, thousands of Sikhs were in the temple at the time of theoffensive. Id.

14. Anil Kalhan, et al., Colonial Continuities: Human Rights, Terrorism, and Security Laws inIndia, 20 COLUM. J. ASIAN L. 93, 142 (2006).

15. Id. at 142-43.16. Robin Cohen, Foreword to DARSHAN SINGH TATLA, THE SIKH DIASPORA: THE SEARCH

FOR STATEHOOD, at vii (Robin Cohen ed., Univ. of Wash. Press 1999) (explaining that it is diffi-cult to decide “whether the Sikhs are a religious community, an ethnic group, a nation, a peopleor even a sect”).

17. See Jerry Kang, Trojan Horses of Race, 118 HARV. L. REV. 1489, 1498-506 (2005).



encing the interaction between the perceiver and the target. This Note ex-plains how, due to “double consciousness,”18 the target responds to thismapping process in varied ways: he or she can (1) contest the mappingrules, (2) contest the categories, or (3) contest the meanings attached to thecategories. This part of the Note also discusses the specific role religionplays in the mapping process. Part II focuses on the time period from theearly 1900s to the 1950s. It first discusses the historical circumstances ofthe period surrounding Sikh racialization and, second, it discusses how thethree potential responses to the racial formation map played out underthese circumstances. To illustrate these three responses, this part focuseson United States v. Thind, as the case concerns the naturalization of a Sikhman. Specifically, the case will help us to understand the inspiration forSikhs’ responses to their racialization and the effects of such responses. InPart III, this Note presents the historical circumstances for the period from1950 to 1980, focusing on the election of Dalip Singh Saund, a Sikh, to theU.S. House of Representatives. This part also analyzes Sikhs’ responses totheir racialization. In Part IV, this Note discusses contemporary events andcircumstances surrounding the racialization of Sikhs, focusing on the pe-riod from 1980 to today.19 Like Parts II and III, this part also outlines howthe targets’ responses to the racial formation map have played out, focusingboth on the sources of the responses as well as on their effect on the racialhierarchy. Part V evaluates the effectiveness of these various target re-sponses in combating subordination and white supremacy.

By analyzing the responses of Sikhs over these three historical periods,this Note aims to show how the responses of Sikhs have: (1) challenged thetools used to map them into certain categories, (2) challenged the catego-ries they are mapped into, and (3) challenged the meanings associated withthese categories. This Note finds that most target responses are incen-tivized by the existing racial hierarchy and that individual targets, in anattempt to navigate their space within that hierarchy, can actually contrib-ute to their own subordination or to the subordination of other racialgroups. Ultimately, this Note finds that these three outlined responses aremost successful when undertaken with the purpose of challenging the nega-tive meanings attached to whatever racial category an individual is filteredinto.

18. Double consciousness refers to the idea of viewing one’s self though the eyes of anotherand merging this perception with one’s own perception of the self. W.E.B. DU BOIS, THE SOULS

OF BLACK FOLK (1903), reprinted in THREE NEGRO CLASSICS 207, 215 (Avon Books 1965).19. This Note is organized along these three historical periods because they are natural

breaking points with regards to the events and circumstances that affect racialization.



I. RACIAL FORMATION

A. The Racial Formation Map

1. General Overview

Kang explains the process of racial formation through racial schemas.A schema is a “cognitive structure that represents knowledge about a con-cept or type of stimulus, including its attributes and the relations amongthose attributes.”20 People use schemas in order to classify the people thatthey interact with according to race. The racial schema operates as follows:First, “society provides us (the perceivers) with a set of racial categoriesinto which we map an individual human being (the target) according toprevailing rules of racial mapping.” Second, after a person is “assigned to aracial category, implicit and explicit racial meanings associated with thatcategory are triggered.” Third, these “racial meanings then influence ourinterpersonal interaction” with the target.21 This map facilitates an under-standing of the three points at which the racial formation process is crystal-lized. In addition, it also illustrates that “all three components —racialcategories, mapping rules, and racial meanings— are contingent, con-structed and contestable. Not one of these is biologically inevitable.”22 Inorder to reinforce the constructed nature of racial mapping, the remainderof this Note refers to “mapping rules” as “mapping tools.”23

DIAGRAM A: KANG’S FIGURE 1

mapping rules

categories

meanings

individual

mapped through into

which activate that alter interaction

with

20. Kang, supra note 17, at 1498 (internal quotations omitted).21. Id. at 1499 (emphasis omitted). See Figure 1.22. Id. at 1501-02.23. This Note does so because by referring to them as tools, it is better able to capture the

ways these “tools” are constructed and used for distinct purposes rather than abstractly existingin space. These “tools” have been manipulated, changed and have thus had an active hand in theracial formation process. This Note does not contend, however, that Professor Kang is in factarguing the opposite by using the term “rules.”



To summarize, racialization is the “process by which social, economic,and political forces determine the content and importance of racial catego-ries” and it takes place in the three spaces discussed above. The process of“extension of racial meaning to a previously racially unclassified relation-ship, social practice or group”24 is a complicated and multifaceted processthat is influenced by the context in which it takes place. In the case ofSikhs, categorization into a single racial category that extends over time isunrealistic, as classifications change temporally and spatially. Thus, the ra-cial categories Sikhs have been placed into are difficult to name and mightinclude the “Hindu,” “Muslim” or “Muslim-looking” categories, or eventhe “Terrorist” category, as this category has become a heavily race-basedterm.25 It is this process of categorization, the interactions that flow fromthis categorization, and the responses that are inspired by it that are ofconcern in this Note.

2. Religion as a Mapping Tool

Various mapping tools —including phenotype, nationality, language,descent, and religion— are used to filter individuals into racial categories.Religion plays a central role in racialization because it guides which racialcategory targets are placed into. Moreover, racial categories themselvesmay be developed according to religious identity.26 Religion affects classi-fication and racialization because it is largely tied to the notion of assimila-bility.27 Critical Race Theory has nodded to the role religion plays in theracialization process by articulating if and how religion has informed theperceiver’s willingness to place certain “non-white” targets into the whitecategory based on their acceptance of Christianity.28 The following exam-ples nicely illustrate the role religion has played in the assignment of peo-ple into various racial categories: U.S. naturalization cases dealing withArmenian/Syrian applicants,29 African slaves who were briefly permitted to

24. TOMAS ALMAGUER, RACIAL FAULT LINES: HISTORICAL ORIGINS OF WHITE SUPREMACY

IN CALIFORNIA 2-3 (1994).25. Not only are the categories difficult to name, but there are also multiple categories that

individuals can be filtered into at once, which further illustrates that racialization is a multi-fac-eted process. It may be argued that the reason it is hard to name the category the Sikh is placedinto, is because it was created in a post September 11 domestic situation. That argument failsbecause, as this Note shows, this racialization process is an ongoing process that began before theevents of September 11 and is in constant flux.

26. See ALMAGUER, supra note 24; ROBERT A. WILLIAMS, JR., LIKE A LOADED WEAPON,THE REHNQUIST COURT, INDIAN RIGHTS, AND THE LEGAL HISTORY OF RACISM IN AMERICA 34(2005) (illustrating the way “racial groups” as we know them now were determined along andinformed by religious distinctions).

27. ALMAGUER, supra note 24, at 62.28. WILLIAMS, JR., supra note 26 (explaining the role of Christianity in the racialization of

Native Americans); LAURA GOMEZ, MANIFEST DESTINIES: THE MAKING OF THE MEXICAN

AMERICAN RACE 50 (N.Y. Univ. Press 2007) (explaining the role of Christianity with regard toMexicans in the United States).

29. In re Halladjian, 174 F. 834 (D. Mass, 1909). The court discussed the religion of Armeni-ans in determining their whiteness, illustrating the way that religion plays a role in the perceptionof one as “western,” “assimilated,” and, therefore “white,” id. at 839.



avoid slavery if they accepted Christianity upon arrival to the UnitedStates,30 the religion-informed hierarchy of Mexicans in the UnitedStates,31 and Native Americans who, for a short period of time, were tran-siently classified differently upon accepting Christianity.32

It is not true that religion always determines an individual’s placementinto a particular racial category. Phenotype, for example, may control thecategorization in some situations and filter a target into one group insteadof another.33 In addition, it is important to note that in the case of theSikhs, religion and phenotype are closely related, thus, it is difficult to seg-regate out which tool is controlling the mapping. Even while religion is notalways determinative of one’s racial category placement, it is nonetheless akey tool used by both perceivers and targets alike.

B. Re-thinking the Model

1. More than Just an Outward Process

The racial formation model makes explicit that the process of racialformation travels in an outward direction, from the interpreter to the tar-get.34 However, Kang also nods to the possibility that the process is notsimply one-directional. He does so by referring to “variables” in the racialformation process, including the salience of one’s race. In addition to racialsalience, the target’s racial performance35 and the target’s responses to theracial formation map (explained below) also contribute to the multi-direc-tional nature of the racialization process. Using the mapping model, thetarget can respond in the following ways: (1) the target argues that theracial mapping tools are defective; (2) she argues that she is being placed inthe wrong racial category altogether or that an accurate category for her“true” identity has not yet been established; or, (3) she argues that themeanings associated with the category she is placed in are flawed and that

30. Khyati Joshi, The Racialization of Hinduism, Islam, and Sikhism in the United States, 39EQUITY & EXCELLENCE IN EDUC. 211, 213 (2006) (explaining that, in the context of Africanslaves brought to the United States, “[b]y accepting Christ, it was asserted, even Blacks could bemade white as snow.”).

31. See ALMAGUER, supra note 24, at 62-63 (explaining that part of the reason why Califor-nia Native Americans and the Mexican population in California were treated differently wasbecause of the Mexican population’s Christian ancestry).

32. WILLIAMS, JR., supra note 26.33. An example: where a Punjabi Sikh man with a turban and beard might be placed in the

“Muslim,” “Arab,” or “Middle Eastern” category in some instances, a Caucasian Sikh, with thesame turban and beard, might not be classified into the same category.

34. This means that the interpreter controls the process by perceiving and placing people intocertain categories.

35. Racial performance is closely tied to racial salience and is “the idea that race is a contin-ual process of negotiating and performing identity. Even though individuals are restricted intheir choices, individuals bring race into being by acting in a particular way.” Racial performanceincludes acting out one’s identity by making certain “choices” with regards to one’s appearance,for example. Sunita Patel, Performative Aspects of Race: Arab, Muslim, and South Asian RacialFormation after September 11, 10 UCLA ASIAN PAC. AM. L.J. 61, 65-66 (2005).



the interpreter’s interactions with that target ought to change.36 This Notecontends that the racialization process encompasses these various re-sponses of the target. See Diagram B for an illustration.

DIAGRAM B: TARGETS’ RESPONSES TO THE RACIAL FORMATION MAP

mapping tools

categories

meanings

perceiver

uses to place targets into

which activate which alter the

interactions betweenthe target and

perceiver

resist categories

target

resist tools

resist meanings

These various responses reveal that race is a social construction andthat perceivers and targets alike play a role in that construction. As such,targets ought to be aware of the responses they undertake and the ramifica-tions those responses have for members of both their own “racial category”and other categories. The potential responses of the individual targets,whether described in terms of the aforementioned three responses, or asracial disambiguation,37 racial brokering,38 or racial distancing,39 ought to

36. Note that there is a considerable amount of overlap in the first and second response. Thetarget may argue that the mapping tools themselves are wrong for normative reasons or that thetools are wrong because they are leading to placement in the wrong category. While this Noteseparates these responses out in the analysis, it does not contend that this is a clearly delineateddivision.

37. This refers to the process of actively marking one’s self as different from members of agroup one does not see themselves to be a part of and/or does not want to be a part of.

38. Lisa Ikemoto, Traces of the Master Narrative in the Story of African American/KoreanAmerican Conflict: How We Constructed “Los Angeles,” 66 S. CAL. L. REV. 1581, 1588-90 (1993)(explaining that in the conflict between Blacks and Koreans in the Los Angeles Riots, each groupengaged in brokering when it attempted to portray itself as superior to the other).

39. Suzanne A. Kim, “Yellow” Skin, “White” Masks: Asian American “Impersonations” ofWhiteness and the Feminist Critique of Liberal Equality, 8 ASIAN L.J. 89, 96 (2001) (explaining



be understood as operating within the current framework of racial hierar-chy. This Note is not attempting to create the illusion that targets havecomplete agency over their responses. Instead, these responses are incen-tivized by the racial hierarchy, and groups are encouraged to engage inthese moves in order to obtain the privileges of whiteness that they aredenied by means of their classification into non-white categories.

2. Double Consciousness and Racial Formation

To better understand the role the target plays in racial formation, thisNote relies on W.E.B Du Bois’ idea of double consciousness. Double con-sciousness is “this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes ofothers, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on inamused contempt and pity.”40 This “tape” is a collection of the mappingtools, categories, and social meanings in racial schemas. Individuals mayeither accept the existing “tape” and adapt accordingly, or try to alter thattape. If an individual is “measured” into a category denying her certainresources —like naturalization and land ownership— reserved for those inthe white category, then this “tape” provides incentive for the target torespond in ways that will assist her to secure those resources. This re-sponse, however, has the potential to re-instantiate the racial hierarchy be-cause it may rely on new, but equally subordinating, measures.

This is the crossroads at which the Sikh finds herself —how can a Sikhrespond to the mapping rules applied to her, the categories she is placedinto, and the meanings attached to those categories without re-inscribingthe racial hierarchy? How has a Sikh dealt with being essentialized as aHindu, being mistaken as a Muslim, being demonized as the “other,” orbeing understood as “perpetually foreign”?41 The remainder of this Note:(1) explores the ways Sikhs have experienced the racialization processthrough various moments in history, and (2) analyzes Sikhs’ various re-sponses to their racialization.

II. EARLY PERIOD: THE EARLY 1900S TO THE 1950S

This part of the Note explores the historical circumstances surroundingearly Sikh immigration and status in the United States, focusing on natural-ization and immigration. These highly racialized processes shed light onthe ways race was historically constructed by the law. After discussingthose circumstances, this part focuses on U.S. v. Thind, a seminal case dis-

that in Thind v. United States, 261 U.S. 204 (1923), the petitioner engaged in distancing when hemade moves to establish space between himself and members of other “racial groups” with whichhe did not want to be identified). An example of this distancing is seen in the aftermath of PearlHarbor, where Chinese immigrants wore buttons reading “Not from Nippon” to establish a cleardelineation between themselves and the Japanese. See Sharon Boswell & Lorraine McConaghy,Abundant Dreams Diverted, SEATTLE TIMES, June 23, 1996, at B2, available at http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/special/centennial/june/internment.html. .

40. DU BOIS, supra note 18.41. Leti Volpp explains this idea of being “perpetually foreign” in The Citizen and the Terror-

ist, 49 UCLA L. REV. 1575, 1586-91 (2002).



cussing questions of race, citizenship, and naturalization in the context of aSikh man’s petition for naturalization. In particular, this part pays closeattention to Thind’s arguments for naturalization in his U.S. SupremeCourt brief, finding that the inspiration for these arguments was primarilythe existing racial hierarchy and Thind’s attempt to secure the privileges ofwhiteness.

A. Historical Circumstances

1. Immigration to the United States

As early as the seventeenth century, Sikhs began to migrate away fromPunjab, India and establish small communities outside of their homeland.42

In 1849, Punjab was annexed by the British, which allowed Sikhs, as mem-bers of the imperial work force, to “migrate to distant countries.”43 Sikhsbegan to migrate to North America in the early twentieth century, arrivingin large numbers to California because of the high demand for agriculturalworkers and the migrants’ farming background in Punjab.44 Between 1902and 1906, Sikh-Punjabi immigration to the West Coast began to increaseand immigration was estimated at 870 Asian-Indians, with nearly 85 per-cent self-identifying as Sikh.45 Most of these immigrants were “uneducatedagriculturalists from the rural areas of the Punjab, who arrived as singlemales or as married men without their wives and children.”46

While Sikhs constitute a small minority in India, measuring only 2 per-cent of the population, some say that they constituted nearly 90 percent ofthe “original Asian-Indian immigrants to the United States.”47 By 1910,there were between 5,000 and 10,000 South Asians in the United States, amajority of them Sikh and a third of them Muslim.48 Nonetheless, theywere all referred to as “Hindoo.”49 The term “Hindu” was also used in theU.S. Census. In 1910 and 1920 the category of “Other” was “designated forSouth Asians, with the sub-categories of ‘Non-white Asiatic/Hindu’ in 1910

42. Ravneet Tiwana, Hyphenated Identities and the Space “In-Between”: Construction of theSikh-American Identity, http://departments.oxy.edu/anthropology/field/tiwana1.html#_ftnref3.

43. Gurinder Singh Mann, Sikhism in the United States of America, in THE SOUTH ASIAN

RELIGIOUS DIASPORA IN BRITAIN, CANADA, AND THE UNITED STATES 259, 259 (Harold Cowardet al., eds., State Univ. of N.Y. Press 2000).

44. Id. at 260.45. Pioneer Asian Indian Immigration to the Pacific Coast, http://www.sikhpioneers.org//pa-

cific.html (last visited Feb. 23, 2009).46. Juan L. Gonzales Jr., Asian Indian Immigration Patterns: The Origins of the Sikh Com-

munity in California, 20 INT’L MIGRATION REV. 40, 42 (1986).47. Id. at 40-41. Gonzales goes on to explain that these numbers have decreased signifi-

cantly, as the majority of Asian Indians living in the United States today are Hindus, id.48. Joshi, supra note 30, at 219.49. Gonzales, supra note 46, at 43 n.4. According to Gonzales, the term “Hindoo” was used

“as a derogatory term for the Asian Indian immigrant[ ]” and was “applied to all Asian Indians. . . in spite of the fact that 95 percent [of them] were Sikhs and not Hindus,” id.



and ‘Hindu’ in 1920.”50 In addition, “[t]he category of Hindu itself ap-peared on the 1930 and 1940 Census forms.”51

2. Early Treatment of Sikhs in the United States

As Sikh farmers began to farm jointly and profit share,52 their growingprominence came to be resented and others termed their immigration the“Hindoo Invasion” or the “Tide of Turbans.”53 In response to the growingeconomic strength of Sikhs, and Asians generally, white Americans formedthe Asiatic Exclusion League, which played a large role in mobilizingagainst Asian immigration.54 Anti-Sikh sentiments emerged not onlywithin the farming community, but also in the general population, as evi-denced by popular media.55 As fears regarding land ownership and eco-nomic success increased, politicians rallied around this anti-immigrantsentiment and first passed the “California Alien Land Law Act of 1913(Alien Land Law),”56 preventing immigrants from owning land, and laterpassed the “Immigration Act of 1917 (Immigration Act),” preventing theimmigration of Indian laborers.57 The Immigration Act, a federal statute,created the “Pacific Barred Zone” which, “held that immigrants from cer-tain parts of Asia, including India, Burma, Siam, and others, would nolonger be allowed to immigrate to the United States.”58 In addition, theAlien Land Law was modified in 1920 to prevent immigrants from owningand leasing their own land, thereby further inhibiting the economic expan-sion of Asians.

The Immigration Act took a toll on the number of Sikhs entering thecountry, while at the same time the nativist response in the United Statesaffected those who had already been admitted.59 The Sikh position can besummarized as being “undesirable”: Sikhs were

50. Vinay Harpalani, Ambiguous Americans?: Critical Race Theory and the Racialization ofSouth Asians in the U.S. 14 (Aug. 16, 2003) (unpublished paper, on file with the American Socio-logical Association), available at http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p106674_index.html.

51. Id.52. Id. at 43 (explaining that they “organized agricultural and economic cooperatives, which

allowed them to pool their economic resources for long-term capital investments” in propertyand equipment).

53. Tiwana, supra note 42.54. IAN F. HANEY-LOPEZ, WHITE BY LAW: THE LEGAL CONSTRUCTION OF RACE 4 (Richard

Delgado & John Stefanic eds., N.Y. Univ. Press 1996). White Americans argued that Asian Indi-ans were an “‘effeminate, caste-ridden, and degraded’ race who did not deserve citizenship,” id.

55. Gonzales, supra note 46, at 44 n.5. Gonzales explains that examples include the follow-ing: “Hindu Immigrants in America,” Missionary Review, December 1907; “Hindu in the North-west,” World Today, November 1907; “Hindu Invasion”, Colliers, March 1910; “Tide of Turbans”,Forum, June 1910; “The Rag Heads –A Picture of America’s East Indians”, The Independent,October 1922; “The Hindu Invasion”, The Pacific Monthly, May 1907; “Hindu: The Newest Immi-gration Problem”, Survey, October 1910.

56. 1 Cal. Gen. Laws Act 261 (Deering 1945) (repealed 1952).57. Pub. L. No. 301, ch. 29, § 3, 39 Stat. 874, 876 (1917).58. Gonzales, supra note 46 at 44.59. Id. at 48. While immigration numbers were decreasing, immigrants were also being de-

ported or “voluntarily” returning to India. Gonzales estimates that nearly 2,000 Asian Indian



not allowed to become citizens, they were not allowed to lease orpurchase property; they were not allowed to send for their wives or futurebrides in India; they were not allowed to travel out of this country; theirparticipation in the labor force was severely limited to occupational cate-gories; they were not allowed to marry Anglo women; and their participa-tion in a nationalistic movement that originated in India and their devoutallegiance to their religious beliefs and cultural traditions further alien-ated and isolated them from the core of American society.60

The question of citizenship and access to rights associated with citizenshipwas thus a pressing one.

3. United States v. Thind

United States v. Thind was the first U.S. Supreme Court case address-ing the rights of an Asian Indian —Bhagat Singh Thind— to achieve citi-zenship through naturalization. The issue certified to the Court in Thindwas: “Is a high caste Hindu of full Indian blood, born at Amrit Sar, Punjab,India, a white person within the meaning of section 2169, Revised Stat-utes?”61 This section of the Revised Statutes provided that naturalizationwould be afforded to “free white persons, and to aliens of African nativityand to persons of African descent.”62 In light of this statute, Thind arguedthat he was in fact a “white person,” and therefore deserving ofcitizenship.63

Thind was a Sikh man from Punjab, India who entered the UnitedStates in 1913.64 After applying multiple times, Thind was granted citizen-ship by the District Court of Oregon in 1920.65 The decision was chal-lenged by the U.S. Naturalization Examiner and the question of Thind’seligibility was certified to the Supreme Court. A year before Thind, theCourt addressed the issue of naturalization eligibility with regards to a Jap-anese applicant in Ozawa v. United States.66 In Ozawa, the Court held thatin order to qualify as white, one must be Caucasian.67 Ozawa, regardless ofhis skin color, language, affiliations, or how people perceived him, did notqualify as white because he was not “Caucasian.”68 Pursuant to this deci-sion, Thind argued that he was Caucasian and that he was, therefore, whiteunder the statute.

Thind’s arguments in support of his whiteness took into account thedominant groups’ perception of both whiteness and of Thind; Double con-

immigrants were deported between 1900 and 1950 and that 4,750 returned to India during thistime, id.

60. Id. at 46.61. United States v. Thind, 261 U.S. 204, 206 (1923).62. Id. at 207.63. Id.64. About Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind, http://www.bhagatsinghthind.com/about.html (last visited

Feb. 23, 2009).65. Id.66. 260 U.S. 178 (1922).67. Id. at 197-99.68. Id.



sciousness drove the arguments in his brief. He was aware of the racialhierarchy and, in negotiating his space in that hierarchy, he was incen-tivized to respond by making arguments about: (1) the mapping tools usedto map him, (2) the category he was placed into, and (3) the meaningsattached to those categories.69

B. Resisting the Mapping Tools

With the Court’s decision in Ozawa in mind, Thind argued that theCourt should not use skin color alone to map him into a racial category:“color alone” is not the only test of the “white or Caucasian race” he ar-gued, but instead, the “true test of race is blood or descent.”70 He arguedthat people from northern India were “no doubt” of white or Caucasianblood, relying on “scientific” evidence that Aryans entered certain parts ofIndia in pre-historic times and are, therefore, different from other Indianraces.71

In addition to blood or descent, Thind also proposed that the Courtuse Thind’s language as evidence of his whiteness. The status of Aryans, heexplained, is confirmed by the fact that they speak the Aryan language and,since he did, he too was Aryan. While Thind acknowledged that “languagedoes not necessarily prove identity of blood, for ordinarily anyone canlearn a foreign language,”72 he responded to this concern by explainingthat the Aryans have been “the conquering race” and that “[n]o other racesuperimposed any foreign language upon them.”73 The fact that Aryansspeak the Aryan language was “very strong evidence that they have sprungfrom the primordial Aryan race who spoke the primordial Aryan lan-guage.”74 Thus, Thind’s proposed tools for determining one’s race werelanguage and conqueror status.

In addition to blood, language, and conqueror status, Thind also ar-gued that the Court ought to use Thind’s religion to map him. He arguedthat because his religion mandated strict adherence to the caste system, hewas pure and had not mixed with any “lower” races. This purity, Thindargued, should be a tool used to classify him as white. Thind explained that“there is no ‘melting pot’ in India” and that “the High-class Hindu regards

69. It might be argued that Thind himself did not have much control over the argumentspresented in the brief. While this is most likely true, we can still acknowledge the fact that hisattorney felt he needed to make these arguments on Thind’s behalf, as a Sikh man, to gain citi-zenship. This argument does not undercut the fact that these were still responses to the racializa-tion of a Sikh man and that they affected the racialization of Sikhs and other groups into thefuture.

70. Brief of Respondent at 10, United States v. Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923) (No. 3745).71. He concludes “the proposition is settled that the people residing in many of the states of

India, particularly in the north and northwest, including the Punjab, belong to the Aryan race.”Id. at 18. He also addresses the argument that “free white persons must be construed in a geo-graphical sense and that only European Caucasians were eligible for citizenship,” id. at 24-28.

72. Id. at 18. An illustration: “A negro can learn the English language but that does notchange his race,” id.

73. Id.74. Id.



the aboriginal Indian Mongoloid in the same manner as the American re-gards the negro, speaking from a matrimonial standpoint.”75 To convincethe Court, Thind explained that “[i]t would be just as disgraceful for a high-class Hindu to marry a member of one of the lower caste as it would be foran American gentlemen to marry a member of the negro race.”76 Thus, thecaste system is an “effective barrier to prevent a mixture of the Aryan withthe dark races of India.”77 By making these arguments, Thind signaled thatAryan blood was pure in the same ways that “white” blood was seen to bepure in the United States. If the courts were worried about even “onedrop” of non-Aryan blood, they need not be concerned because such inter-mixing was forbidden.78 Thus, purity ought to be another tool used to maphim into the white category.

Thind’s proposed mapping tools were influenced by his awareness ofthe dominant group’s perception of him and of other immigrant groups,which was made explicit in the Ozawa decision. Thind tried to change thatperception by proposing new mapping tools that he thought would qualifyhim as Caucasian in the eyes of his perceiver. Specifically, he tried to ap-peal to white supremacy by proposing the tools of conquering status andpurity. These responses show that Thind understood the “tape” being usedto measure him. Even though Thind’s response may have potentially al-lowed his own advantageous classification, these proposed tools may havepossibly perpetuated the subordination of the “darker races.”

C. Resisting the Racial Category

Thind, a Sikh, did not resist placement in the racial category of“Hindu.” In fact, he explicitly refers to himself as a Hindu of high caste.There are three main reasons why Thind may not have resisted beingplaced in the Hindu category: first, although not necessarily accurate,“Hindu” was the accepted dominant geographic marker for all people fromthe South Asian region at the time; second, the Hindu category providedan explicit means to making the argument that Thind was high-caste andpure; and third, claiming higher caste status afforded some materialadvantages.79

Thind only briefly mentioned in his brief that he was a Sikh, with adirect citation to a book stating that Sikhs are Aryan.80 Such casual men-tioning is unusual given the contentious history and doctrinal differences

75. Id. at 20.76. Id. at 22.77. Id.78. The “one drop” rule was articulated in Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856). The court

explained that a person with even “one drop” of “black blood” would be considered black underthe law. Thind’s discussion of the purity of his blood seems to take this “rule” into consideration.

79. The construction of caste in India is tied to the Hindu religion. See The Caste System andStages of Life in Hinduism, http://www.friesian.com/caste.htm (last visited Feb. 23, 2009).

80. Brief of Respondent, supra note 70, at 15. The brief cites to the book The World’s Peo-ples, which indicates that “blue blood,” or Aryan blood, was “conspicuous among . . . the Sikhs,”id.



between the Sikh and Hindu religions.81 For example, the Sikh religionexplicitly denies and attempts to repudiate the caste system, maintainingthat all people are equal. Nonetheless, Thind and other Sikhs may havebeen willing to accept the Hindu category because, in terms of daily life inIndia, Sikhs still lived in a caste-ordered society, and given the Sikhs’ mi-nority status in India, some Sikhs might, if possible, have claimed a higherstatus based on caste.

While Thind did not resist placement in the Hindu category, he didchallenge where some layers of the Hindu category were located. Thindargued that the use of purity, language, and disdain for the lower races asmapping tools would re-locate the upper class layers of the Hindu categorywithin the Caucasian category. This argument, however, was based on sub-ordinating premises, namely the disdain for lower races and the concept ofracial purity. This is not to say that Thind had some special agency in en-gaging in these subordinating moves. Instead, Thind’s experience with theracial hierarchy informed his response. For example, Thind’s argumentthat he was Aryan may have been directly influenced by the historical rela-tionship between Sikhs and the colonial British. The British, in an effort toco-opt Sikhs into their military base, referred to Sikhs as a “martial race”and commented on their descent from “Aryan” blood.82 Thus, Thind mayhave been acting in light of the dominant group’s perception of him, havinginternalized this discourse regarding the Aryan race.

Thind’s arguments for different mapping tools and his resistance to theplacement of his racial category illustrates the ways white supremacy en-courages members of minority groups to differentiate themselves fromother groups in order to gain access to “limited” resources, in this case,naturalization and higher status.

D. Resisting the Meanings Attached to the Categories

By arguing that some Hindus belong in the Caucasian category, Thindalso challenged the meanings associated with the Hindu category. Whilethe dominant group perceived Hindus as inferior and therefore undeserv-ing of citizenship, Thind argued that Hindus ought to be understood aspure and as conquerors, much like the white people in the United States.Thus, Thind’s arguments regarding the meanings attached to the Hinducategory are also closely related to his arguments regarding the mappingtools and the location of the Hindu category. Even while Thind argued forthe attachment of meanings to the Hindu category that might lead togreater civil and political rights and material resources, like citizenship andland ownership, such arguments also have a devastating potential. They

81. See supra Introduction, Subpart A.82. Keith Surridge, Book Review, 12 J. VICTORIAN CULTURE 146, 150 (2007) (reviewing

HEATHER STREETS, MARTIAL RACES: THE MILITARY, RACE AND MASCULINITY IN BRITISH IMPE-

RIAL CULTURE, 1857-1914 (2004)).



might ultimately lead to the denial of a Sikh identity in the law, and theymight also contribute to the re-instantiation of disdain for the dark races.83

E. The Court’s Holding

Despite these three strands of argumentation, the Supreme Court ulti-mately held that Thind did not qualify as white under the statute. TheCourt’s opinion reflects the sentiments informing the racial hierarchy. TheCourt reasoned that it used the term “Caucasian” in Ozawa in its popularsense, and not in its scientific sense.84 The popular sense, as the court ex-plained, is narrower than Thind’s understanding of the term.85 One’s race,the Court wrote, depends on his or her possession of “requisite characteris-tics,” not one’s descent from a “remote, common ancestor.”86 The Courtcontinued, “[i]t may be true that the blond Scandinavian and the brownHindu have a common ancestor in the dim reaches of antiquity, but theaverage man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable andprofound differences between them today.”87 Thus, the test for determin-ing whether one qualifies as white is not whether he has the same origin asothers who qualify as white, but instead whether the common man wouldsee him as white. The only people seen as white upon adoption of thestatute included people the framers “knew as white,” the “bone of theirbone and flesh of their flesh.”88 Thind, a Sikh man bearing a turban andbeard, did not have the requisite bone and flesh to qualify as white.

Thind was aware of the sentiments that informed the perceivers’ map-ping. These sentiments influenced his arguments regarding the tools, cate-gories, and meanings that control the racialization process. The Thind caseis helpful to understanding the racialization process because it shows thatwhile the targets’ responses may have the potential to afford greater rights,they simultaneously have the potential to subordinate others.

III. MIDDLE PERIOD: 1950 TO 1980

This part addresses Sikh immigration patterns between 1950 and 1980,and focuses on the historical circumstances surrounding the election ofDalip Singh Saund to the U.S. Congress. It focuses on Saund because he isa prominent Sikh public figure whose experiences speak to the racializationprocess. This part pays attention to primarily two of the three responses toracialization, the resistance, or lack of resistance, to one’s placement in aracial category and the resistance to the meanings attached to thosecategories.

83. See text accompanying supra note 77.84. Thind, 261 U.S. at 208-09.85. Id.86. Id. at 209.87. Id.88. Id. at 213.




1. Immigration Patterns

The second historical period saw a change in Sikh immigration andstatus. Sikhs who immigrated during this time typically came to pursuehigher education: “[u]nlike their predecessors who worked as laborers,saved money, bought lands, and began to farm, these Sikhs prepared them-selves for professional careers and garnered white-collar jobs.”89 Immigra-tion figures during this period are much larger than those in the last period,with nearly 6,371 Asian Indians immigrating to the United States between1945 and 1965.90 This can be partially attributed to the Luce Celler Act of1946, which “opened the ‘barred’ zone and granted [an immigration quotaand] naturalization rights to Asian Indians.”91 Before this period, mostAsian Indian immigrants were involved in farm or non-farm labor, whereasafter the Act’s passage, there was increased professional diversity amongstimmigrants from the Punjab region. In California, however, most PunjabiSikhs remained near farm land and in the farming profession. By 1975, thePunjabi population in the Yuba/Sutter bi-county area grew to 4,000 and by1980-1981, it reached nearly 6,000.92 The efforts of earlier Sikh pioneers inestablishing communities assisted new Sikh immigrants to more easily ad-just and develop their communities. Moreover, with the increase in immi-gration of Sikh women and families, the Sikh communal identitystrengthened.

2. Dalip Singh Saund

Dalip Singh Saund, the first South Asian to win a seat in the U.S Con-gress, emerged from this developing community.93 Saund, a Sikh born inPunjab, India, traveled to the United States to pursue an education at theUniversity of California, Berkeley where he received a Masters of Arts in1922 in mathematics and a Doctorate degree in 1924.94 Unable to find ajob in mathematics, Saund worked as a lettuce farmer.

Saund eventually became a citizen in 1949 in part as a result of his ownefforts to pursue naturalization rights for “Hindus.”95 Saund was electedless than a year later as judge of the Justice Court in Imperial County, butwas unable to take seat because he had not been a citizen for one yearwhen elected.96 In 1952, he was re-elected to the same position, serving

89. Mann, supra note 43, at 26090. Gonzales, supra note 46, at 49.91. Tiwana, supra note 42; see also Gonzales, supra note 46, at 49. According to Gonzales,

nearly 1,772 Asian Indians became citizens as a result of the Act between 1948 and 1965, id.92. Margaret J. Gibson, Punjabi Orchard Farmers: An Immigrant Enclave in Rural Califor-

nia, 22 INT’L MIGRATION REV. 28, 34 (1988).93. Inder Singh, Congressman Saund-the First Native of Asia, http://www.la-indiacenter.com/

page10.htm (last visited Feb. 2, 2009).94. Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, Saund Dalip Singh, (1899 - 1973),

http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=s000075.95. Id.96. Id.



until January, 1957. In 1956, Saund was elected by the twenty-ninth Con-gressional District of California97 to the U.S. House of Representatives.

During his three terms, Saund worked to combat racism in the UnitedStates. For example, in 1957 he delivered a speech on the floor of theHouse and expressed gratitude that he and Congressman Noah Mason, arepresentative from Illinois, both of whom were foreign born, were able toserve as Members of Congress. He went on to ask “[i]f he had been bornin the state of Mississippi and born with black skin, would he be a Memberof the United States Congress today?”98 He also expressed concern that“not one Negro is a registered voter” in thirteen counties in the state ofMississippi.99

B. Resisting the Mapping Tools

It seems that Saund did not explicitly challenge the mapping tools usedto place him in the Hindu category100; instead he accepted and organizedaround that categorization. Regardless, it is still important to inquire inthis part what tools were potentially used to map Saund into the Hinducategory because this analysis sheds light on how Sikhs were racialized dur-ing this period. Saund’s life accounts indicate that he was a Sikh and thathe affirmed his Sikh identity. In fact, accounts of Saund’s life indicate thathe kept a turban and a beard when he first entered into politics and that hesuffered discrimination as a result of his appearance.101 Photographs ofSaund during his run for office, however, show Saund without a turban andbeard.102 It is unclear when he removed these aspects of his religious iden-tity. Given the debate within the Sikh religion as to whether one who failsto observe the Five Ks103 is truly a Sikh,104 it is important to questionwhether phenotype was used to map Saund into a racial category that didnot impede his campaign for Congress. Some would argue that, because ofSaund’s appearance, his racialization does not speak to that of the Sikhcommunity. This is not necessarily true because even though Saund’sracialization experience may have been somewhat different, it still speaksto the racialization of Sikhs overall because of factors such as Saund’sname, skin color, and foreign-born status, features many Sikhs share. His

97. This district was composed of the Riverside and Imperial counties.98. 103 CONG. REC. H9197 (daily ed. June 14, 1957) (statement of Rep. Saund), available at

http://www.saund.org/dalipsaund/website-images/061457-speech-s40.jpg.99. Id.

100. Narratives describing Saund’s life show that he was referred to as a “Hindu” during hiscampaign for office. See Roots in the Sand-Dalip Saund 3, http://www.pbs.org/rootsinthesand/dalip.pdf (last visited Mar. 11, 2009).

101. Id.102. Id.103. See supra text accompanying note 9 for a discussion of the Five Ks.104. Note that some people would not even maintain that this point is debatable.



phenotype, regardless of whether or not he had a beard and turban, stillaffected the category into which he was placed.105

In addition to phenotype, racial performance106 is also a tool used tomap individuals into certain racial categories. One might argue thatSaund’s marriage to a white woman from California was a performative actthat influenced perceivers to map Saund into a racial category differentfrom that of other Asian Indians.107 These mapping tools —mainly pheno-type and racial performance in the case of Saund— are important becausethey show that individuals within a single “racial” group can experience“differential racialization.”108 Also of importance are Saund’s responses tohis category placement and to the meanings attached to that category.

C. Resisting the Categories

Throughout this historical period, Sikhs were still placed squarely inthe Hindu category. Saund embraced this marker as a point of organizingand lobbied the government to allow “Hindus” to become naturalized citi-zens.109 Saund, a Sikh, accepted this designated identity because: (1) thedominant group assigned all people from the South Asian region to thiscategory, and (2) he was better able to secure civil and political rights byorganizing people under this umbrella category. This strategic decisionhelped to secure the naturalization rights of this large group of immigrants.Regardless of his own affirmation of Sikh identity, Saund did not reject theHindu category. He was aware of the “tape” used to measure him into thiscategory and saw that he could pursue certain rights by organizing underit.110 The racial hierarchy encouraged Saund to argue not that he belongedin a different category, but instead that the category itself ought to havedifferent meanings attached to it.

D. Resisting Meanings Associated with the Category

Saund did not resist the Hindu category; instead, he actively worked tochange the negative meanings attached to it and to other racialized groups.His “double consciousness” helped him to be aware of the way he andother people of color were understood and his response took that under-standing into account. Saund not only argued that Hindus were equallydeserving of citizenship, but also that Blacks in the South were equally de-

105. This is another example of the Note’s use of essentialism, however, as discussed in Spi-vak, supra, note 9, this essentialism is useful in helping us to understand the greater trends sur-rounding racialization.

106. See Patel, supra note 35.107. This Note does not contend that this is in fact the case; however, it should still be recog-

nized as an element in the racialization process.108. For a discussion of differential racialization, see Neil Gotanda, Comparative Racializa-

tion: Racial Profiling and the Case of Wen Ho Lee, 47 UCLA L. REV. 1689 (2000). This Note isnot necessarily contending that this is an example of differential racialization, but is instead sug-gesting that this is an area ripe for inquiry.

109. See supra note100, at 6.110. See supra note 100.



serving of participation in civil and political life. He thus engaged in effortsto combat the greater meaning of inferiority attached to racial minoritiesthroughout the United States.

An important part of Saund’s resistance to these meanings was hisability to maintain his own sense of identity. Even in the face of discrimi-natory campaigning during his run for Congress, he did not change hisname or refute arguments that he was a foreign, “Hindu judge.”111 Saund,taking the dominant group’s perceptions into account, engaged in a re-sponse contesting the subordination of his community and of other com-munities of color. Some may argue, however, that this victory resulted inpotential losses for the Sikh community by: (1) setting the stage for greaterignorance about Sikh identity; (2) leading to the silencing or invisibility ofSikhs in legal discourse more generally; or, (3) creating subsequent diffi-culty securing identity-based rights. Regardless, Saund’s experience illus-trates that it is possible to challenge the meanings attached to the categoryone is filtered into without engaging in the subordination of other groupsof people.112

IV. CONTEMPORARY PERIOD: 1980 TO PRESENT


This part focuses on immigration patterns as well as key events thatillustrate the targeting and the misunderstanding of Sikh identity from 1980to the present. This period of time is especially important because it is ripewith events directly impacting and affecting the racialization of Sikhs. Byfocusing on events before and after September 11, this part explicitly in-tends to show that the racialization of Sikhs is not the direct result of Sep-tember 11, but instead a process that has continued since and can be tracedback to early Sikh immigration.

1. Immigration Patterns

The third wave of Sikh immigration in this contemporary period waspartially the result of political upheaval in Punjab.113 During the 1980s,many Sikhs came to the United States seeking political asylum114 after hav-ing been the subjects of directed attacks by both government and non-gov-ernment actors.115 These attacks resulted in a decade of violence and the

111. Jackie & the Judge, TIME, Oct. 8, 1956, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,824406,00.html (last visited Feb. 2, 2009). See also supra note 100, at 8.

112. This Note is not arguing that Saund fully or even intentionally engaged in an effort tochallenge the meanings attached to racial categories. Instead, the analysis is meant to illustratethat it is possible to challenge the meanings attached to racial categories.

113. TATLA, supra note 16, at viii.114. Ami Laws & Vincent Iacopino, Police Torture in Punjab, India: An Extended Survey, 6

HEALTH & HUM. RTS J. 195, 198 (2002).115. See supra Introduction, Subpart A.



deaths of nearly 20,000 people.116 These events are important because theysparked calls for a separate Sikh state, Khalistan, and solidified the con-struction of a Sikh identity as more than a religious group. The Sikh psychebecame infused with views of its community as a political, ethnic, and racialgroup with an identity separate from other groups in India.117 This psychecontinues to influence Sikh calls for self-identification and autonomy bothin India and in the United States. The following sections outline some keymoments that influenced the racialization of Sikhs during this contempo-rary period.118

2. Instances of Mistaken Identity

The current era of Sikh racialization has been dominated by instancesof mistaken and misunderstood identity, where Sikhs were and are mappedinto the “Muslim,” “Muslim-looking,” or “Terrorist” category.119 One suchinstance was the reported hijacking of an Indian Airlines jet on December25, 1999. Several major newspapers, including the New York Times, ranstories on December 25 repeatedly asserting that the hijackers were Sikhmen.120 On December 28, however, the New York Times added a five linecorrection indicating that they “misstated the ethnicity of the hijackers andomitted attribution for the description” and that the hijackers were nowbelieved to be “Islamic militants who support Kashmir’s independencefrom India.”121

The events of September 11, 2001 incited many subsequent incidentsof mistaken and misunderstood identity, where Sikhs were mistaken asMuslims or as terrorists.122 One of the most extreme examples of such inci-dents took place on September 15, 2001, when Frank Silva Roque mur-dered Balbir Singh Sodhi in Mesa, Arizona, justifying his actions byproclaiming that he stood “for America.”123 Balbir Sodhi’s brother,

116. Haresh Pandya, Jagjit Singh Chauhan, Sikh Militant Leader in India, Dies at 80, N.Y.TIMES, Apr. 11, 2007, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/world/asia/11chauhan.html?_r=1&oref=slogin (last visited Feb.2, 2009). See also TATLA, supra note 16, at 1 (discussing gener-ally the attacks on Sikh places of worship); p. 5, discussing the events of 1984.

117. See text accompanying supra note 16.118. These instances are in no way meant to be comprehensive. Instead, this Note chooses a

few that are important for making points about racialization.119. This Note refers to “Terrorist” as a racial category because classification into that group

is almost always based off of a perceiver’s understanding of a target’s race.120. Susan Sachs, Hijackers Send Indian Jet on Odyssey, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 25, 1999, http://

query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9805E3DA1039F936A15751C1A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 (last visited Feb. 2, 2009).

121. Id.122. The Sikh Coalition reports 21 “incidents” reported to them on September 11 alone. The

Sikh Coalition, http://www.sikhcoalition.org/ListReports.asp?m=& (last visited Feb. 2, 2009). TheNew York Times reports that by September 18, 2001 more than 200 Sikhs had reported incidents.Laurie Goodstein & Tamar Lewin, A Nation Challenged: Violence and Harassment; Victims ofMistaken Identity, Sikhs Pay a Price for Turbans, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 19, 2001, http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06EED9123BF93AA2575AC0A9679C8B63 (last visited Feb. 2,2009). It can also be argued that Sikhs were misidentified as Muslims and as a result of thisclassification were understood to be terrorists.

123. Mike Anton, Collateral Damage in War on Terrorism, L.A. TIMES, Sept. 22, 2001, at A26.



Sukhpal Sodhi, was killed less than a year later while driving a taxi in SanFrancisco.124 Nine months later, Avtar Chiera, a Phoenix truck driver, wasshot by three men who told Chiera to “[g]o back to where you belongto.”125 Other reported incidents of violence immediately following Sep-tember 11 included vandalism of Sikh temples, gasoline bombs thrown atSikh homes, and personal attacks of violence.126

3. Targeting of Sikh Identity

Prime examples of the targeting of Sikh identity include instanceswhere both government actors and private actors targeted members of theSikh community by regulating appearance. One Sikh man who was tryingto defend a case in court, for example, was not allowed into the courtroomunder the court’s “no hats” policy.127 In addition, corporations and thepenal system alike, regulate one’s ability to keep articles of the Sikh faith(including the turban, beard and kirpan), regardless of the fact that theseare religiously mandated.128 Moreover, under the guise of the Transporta-tion Security Administration (TSA), the government allows extensivescreening of turbans at airports, including physical handling by TSA offi-cials and public removal.129 It may be argued that such actions target “oth-erness” as opposed to Sikh identity, in particular. The scrutiny of theseSikh religious articles, however, is not necessarily due to the actual natureof the article, but instead is due to the ways those articles are perceived—asbeing closely related to the identities of those engaged in terrorism. Thus,this screening contributes to the racialization of Sikhs.

Another example of the targeting of Sikh identity is the 1997 conflictover the construction of a gurdwara, a Sikh place of worship, in San Jose,California.130 The plans for the gurdwara met all of the city’s requirementsand the city officials themselves “expressed no real opposition to the

124. Balbir Sodhi Singh’s Brother Killed, http://www.sikhnet.com/s/SukhpalSodhi (last visitedFeb. 2, 2009). Note that the SF police maintain that the motivation for the crime was unknownand that they have not classified the incident as a hate crime. See Jaxon Van Derbeken, AmericanNightmare, S.F. GATE, Aug. 2, 2002, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/08/06/MN242769.DTL (last visited Mar. 3, 2009).

125. Sikh American Legal Defense & Education Fund, http://saldef.org/content.aspx?a=471&emc=&m=3861925&v=1020673267&l=14 (last visited Feb. 2, 2009).

126. Goodstein & Lewin, supra note 122.127. See Sikh Coalition, Not Let Into a Courtroom Because of a Turban, http://www.sikhcoali-

tion.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=424 (last visited Feb. 2, 2009).128. See, e.g., Wright v. Raines, 457 F. Supp. 1082 (D.C. Kan. 1978); Sikh Coalition, ATT

Reverses Kirpan Ban, http://sikhcoalition.org/advisories/attreverseskirpanban.htm (last visitedFeb. 2, 2009). See also www.sikhcoalition.org/advisories/kirpandmanindersinghvictory.htm (lastvisited March 3, 2009) for a discussion of twenty cases regarding Sikhs’ rights to carry the kirpan.

129. For instances of public removal, see, e.g., www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainac-tion=viewreport&reportid=266, www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=262, www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=256,www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=248, www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=236, www.sikhcoalition.org/hatecrime.asp?mainaction=viewreport&reportid=230.

130. This was not the only time that such opposition arose to the construction of a Sikh placeof worship, as Singh reports that similar resistance had been displayed in both New York and San



plans.”131 Local citizens, however, were opposed to the construction of theplace of worship, stating that they “[didn’t] want it in our neighborhood”because the gurdwara’s accompanying noise, traffic and differential archi-tectural style would disrupt the neighborhood.132 In addition, there wereconcerns over violence that had broken out at a nearby gurdwara inFremont, California months earlier.133

More recent examples of targeting the Sikh identity include: (1) policeviolence against a Sikh family in Houston, Texas, and (2) a U.S. Airwaysflight’s refusal to take off with three Sikh men on board. In early Decem-ber, 2008 in Houston, police were called to the Tagore family home afterthe owners reported a burglary.134 Harris county police were dispatched tothe scene and, once there, began questioning a family member, KawaljeetKaur, about her kirpan.135 Although Kaur explained the kirpan was anarticle of her faith and offered to leave if it was causing a problem, Kaurwas: (1) ordered to “shut up” and a Taser was aimed at her head, (2) forcedto the ground with “a knee . . . put to her back” and handcuffed by threeofficers, and (3) subjected to watching the handcuffing of her family, in-cluding her sixty-year-old mother. The family was asked if they had “heardabout the bombings in Bombay” and were told by the police that they (thepolice) “knew about Muslims.”136 In the U.S. Airways incident, three Sikhreligious musicians were asked to get off of a U.S. Airways flight on No-vember 15, 2008 and were told that the pilot refused to fly with them onboard.137

Diego. Jaideep Singh, “No Sikh Jose:” Sikh American Community Mobilization and InterracialCoalition Building in the Construction of a Sacred Site, 8 ASIAN PAC. AM. L.J. 173, 199 (2002).

131. Id. at 180.132. Id. at 181 (emphasis added). The local citizens put forth five reasons for their opposition:

“1) the increase in traffic to the gurdwara would inundate the neighborhood with cars; 2) noisefrom the gurdwara would disrupt their lives; 3) the architecture would not fit in with the neigh-borhood scheme; 4) the building would be too large and would obstruct their view; and 5) touristswould flood the area because of the tremendous beauty of the gurdwara.” These reasons werepretext for discriminating against the Sikh community and depicted Sikhs as disruptive and una-ble to fit into the community, id.

133. Id. at 184. Jaideep Singh explains that there had been a fight inside of a gurdwara inFremont in the past and that the police were called in. San Jose residents argued that “The Sikhorganization has established a precedent of being undesirable neighbors with incidents involvingtheir temple in Fremont,” id.

134. Sikh Coalition, Family Reporting Burglary is Handcuffed, Reference made to Muslimsand Bombay Bombings, http://www.sikhcoalition.org/advisories/houstonpdharasssikhfamily.htm(last visited Feb. 2, 2009).

135. See supra text accompanying note 9, explaining that this kirpan is one of the articles offaith carried by Sikhs.

136. Sikh Coalition, supra note 134. This incident was resolved when a supervisor in the po-lice department came to the scene and ordered the family members be released. None of themwere formally charged with a crime or arrested. Id.

137. Press Release, United Sikhs, US Airways Pilot Refuses to Fly Plan Unless Three SikhsGet Off (Nov. 26, 2008), http://www.unitedsikhs.org/PressReleases/PRSRLS-26-11-2008-00.htm(last visited Feb. 2, 2009). The three men boarded the flight after clearing security in Sacramentoand were scheduled to transfer on connecting flight to Salt Lake City, Utah. The men weresitting in the rear of the plane and after having been on the plane for approximately ten minuteswere approached and asked to exit the plane, id.



B. Resistance to Mapping Tools

In situations involving mistaken identity during the contemporary pe-riod, Sikhs resisted the tools mapping them into the “Muslim” or “terror-ist” category. Sikhs argued that phenotypic traits, specifically the turbanand beard, should not be used to place them in the “Muslim” or “terrorist”categories, but instead that religion (namely religious differences fromMuslims) should be the sole tool used to place them in a different racialcategory altogether. This argument corresponds to prior historical exper-iences where both members of the Sikh religion and outsiders alike wereunclear whether to consider Sikhs an ethnicity, race, or religious group.138

In the context of mistaken identity, advocating for new mapping toolsis difficult for a few reasons. First, the perceiver may not care if she isincorrectly labeling certain individuals. Second, it may be inconvenient forthe perceiver to use the suggested tools. Third, the proposed tools, as inThind, may not be more effective than those already in place. Finally, itmay be difficult for targets and perceivers to disrupt, or navigate around,mapping tools that have become internalized.139

As targets come to understand the mapping tools of phenotype, relig-ion, purity, and performance as perpetual and immutable, many have optedto abide by these existing tools and respond by decreasing their racial sali-ence in order to change their assigned category. Some Sikh males and fe-males alike, for example, have cut their hair and/or have stopped wearingturbans in order to decrease their racial salience and avoid being placed inthe “Muslim” or “terrorist” racial category. Such responses illustrate thedifficult choices Sikhs face in asserting their identity, and demonstrate thedifficulty the entire Sikh community faces in affirmatively establishing anidentity. Sikhs’ double consciousness makes them aware of the “tape” thatis being used to measure them into certain categories and their responsereflects that understanding. Thus, the racial hierarchy encourages thesetargets to decrease their racial salience to avoid both state and privateviolence.

C. Resisting the Racial Category

Instead of arguing that the applied mapping tools are flawed, sometargets —upon realizing an inability to decrease the salience of certain ra-cial features, such as skin color— have instead argued that they are beingmapped into the wrong category.

138. TATLA, supra note 16, at vii (explaining that it is difficult to decide “whether the Sikhsare a religious community, an ethnic group, a nation, a people or even a sect”).

139. By “internalized,” this Note means that targets may think that the mapping tools existabstractly in space and that they cannot be changed. As a result, targets may think that they mustchange their condition or identity to take advantage of, or at least not suffer at the hands of, thesetools.



1. Responding to the 1999 Indian Airlines Hijacking

After several newspapers ran stories mistakenly claiming that Sikhswere responsible for the 1999 Indian Airlines hijacking,140 many Sikhswrote to the papers to “correct” such errors, articulating the argument thatSikhs are not Muslims and should not be mistaken as such. In January2000, someone wrote to the Fresno Bee explaining that “the hijacking waswrongly attributed to members of the Sikh faith” and that while “the hi-jacking and murder of an innocent passenger are deplorable acts andshould be rightfully condemned . . . it is a travesty that blame should fall onthose who are innocent.”141 Another writer, to the Chicago Sun-Times, ex-plained that the newspaper had incorrectly explained Sikhs and their his-tory with the Indian government, clarifying that Sikhs are neither Hindunor Muslim.142 Another writer to the Washington Times was able to elicit alengthy response from the newspaper acknowledging their error. TheWashington Times wrote that “the Sikh community in Washington is veryangry with the Washington Times” because “instead of finding the factspatiently and professionally, [the] paper has blamed Sikh militants for hi-jacking the plane” thereby “smear[ing] the entire Sikh community.”143

These responses to mistaken identity are interesting because they donot discuss any particularized backlash against Sikh individuals that di-rectly resulted from the newspapers’ misreporting. Instead, the writers ar-ticulated concerns regarding the community’s reputation, and perhapsmore importantly to these writers, factual correctness. Understandingthese responses first requires an understanding of the Sikh community’sself-awareness as a distinct political, ethnic, and religious entity.144 Thisheightened self-awareness left Sikhs both more sensitive to and more will-ing to respond to such mischaracterizations.

In addition, this response should be understood in light of Sikhs’desires to avoid possible negative repercussions. Sikhs distanced them-selves from the racial category in question, possibly because they wereaware of that different racial groups are seen as fungible. In other words, ifthey did not distinguish themselves from Muslims, they would ultimatelybear the burden for another “group’s” bad acts. This parallels the logicthat underlies racial profiling and hate crimes: the terrorist was a memberof group X, therefore all members of group X must be terrorists.145 Thus,

140. Sachs, supra note 120.141. Deep Singh, Letter to the Editor, “Bad Journalism,” FRESNO BEE, Jan. 5, 2000, at B6.142. Navreet Kaur Basati, Letter to the Editor, The Sikh Perspective, CHI. SUN-TIMES, Jan. 6,

2000, at 26. The writer, concerned with the newspaper’s claims that “Sikh militants have wagedviolent campaigns of assassinations and bombings against the Indian government” explained that“[n]owhere is it said [in those newspapers] what the Indian government has done to Sikhs in Indiain the last two decades that prompted militant Sikhs to protect themselves from being tortured,killed and erased from the face of India, id.

143. David W. Jones, Editorial, WASH. TIMES, Jan. 2, 2000, at C11.144. See supra Introduction, Subpart A and IV(A)(1).145. See generally Muneer Ahmad, A Rage Shared by Law: Post September 11 Violence as

Crimes of Passion, 92 CAL. L. REV. 1259 (2004).



the target is aware that the perceiver views all members of the criminal’sracial group as responsible for the act in question and responds to avoidthat affiliation, again illustrating the role of double consciousness in in-forming a target’s response. This response also shows that a target’s re-sponse to his or her racialization is not solely the product of individualagency. Instead, the existing racial structure encourages such a responseand the response itself contributes to the racialization process.146

2. Responding to the September 11 Attacks

The responses after September 11 differ only slightly from those previ-ously discussed in Part IV.C.1. After September 11, there were reports ofviolence specifically directed towards Sikh individuals by both private andgovernment actors.147 Thus, Sikh responses to mistaken identity after Sep-tember 11 were multi-faceted, coupling attempts at “factual correction” re-garding the crime’s perpetrators with attempts to directly resist actualviolence against the community. Many individuals responded to the mis-taken identity of Sikhs with explicit requests not to be placed in the “Mus-lim” category. For example, this sentiment was initially expressed byLakhwinder Singh, the brother of Sodhi, who said “[M]y brother and I andsome other Sikhs . . . talked about going to the media to try to clarify thatwe are not Muslims,” he continued, “[w]e knew there was very little under-standing of Sikhs in this country.”148 Moreover, in September, 2001, “hun-dreds of Sikhs participated in a demonstration . . . to protest against theterrorist attacks in the United States.”149 During these protests, demon-strators “carr[ied] placards that said that ‘Sikhs are not Muslims’ and‘Bush, Educate the American people that Sikhs are not Muslims orArabs.’”150 This argument implicitly sent the message that since Sikhs didnot commit the acts in question; they ought not to be placed in the suspectcategory. Requests to be removed from the “Muslim” or “terrorist look-ing” groups were subsequently followed by requests to place Sikhs either intheir own, separate Sikh category, or in the Asian Indian category ratherthan the “Muslim” or “terrorist looking” group.

As discussed in part IV(C)(1), this response was a provoked one. It isthe result of a racial hierarchy that places blame on similar looking peopleswhen one “member” of a category is a bad actor. The Sikh response is nota novel one. It is directly parallel to the response of the Chinese who wore

146. To be explicit, one of the ways it contributes to the racialization process is by implicitlyapproving of violence against and the profiling of members of the racial group in question. Bydisclaiming membership in that group in such a fashion, a target is furthering the negative mean-ings attached to that racial category.

147. This is different from the response in 1999 where the concern was more over factualcorrectness and the potential for violence than it was about actual violence.

148. Goodstein & Lewin, supra note 122.149. Onkar Singh, Attacks on Sikhs Worries Indians, REDIFF.COM, Sept. 17, 2001, http://www.

rediff.com/us/2001/sep/17ny30.htm (last visited Feb. 2, 2009).150. Id.



buttons reading “Not from Nippon” to avoid blame after Pearl Harbor.151

The response is also similar to the racial brokering that occurred betweenAfrican Americans and Korean Americans during the Los Angeles Riots.Each group tried to position itself as superior to the other, with AfricanAmericans claiming American identity and loyalty, and Koreans Ameri-cans claiming American work ethic and values.152 Similarly, some Sikh re-sponses attempted to portray the Sikh community as more American andas more loyal than the Muslim community. This brokering, as LisaIkemoto explains, is problematic because one minority group’s attempts toposition itself as superior to other groups locates the problem as betweenthese communities and obscures the role whiteness plays in facilitating thisdistancing.153

Accompanying calls for placement in the “correct” racial categorywere efforts to educate the public about Sikhism. This Note does not un-derstand these activities to be resistance to the “Muslim” category, but in-stead sees them as attempts to affirm ethnic identity.154 Given the historicinability to affirm Sikh identity, it would seem unfair to condemn Sikhs fortaking this opportunity to affirmatively explain both who they are and thedetails of their identity and religion. These efforts are potentially catharticand transformative. Sodhi’s brother, for example, engaged in an educa-tional campaign that travels to various schools and communities in thePhoenix area.155 The Sikh Coalition also launched a massive campaign toeducate the public about Sikhs that includes distributing various print me-dia, and engaging with political representatives and media. These efforts toaffirm identity should not be denied to Sikhs, who have been unable toclearly establish their identity in the United States.

The ultimate usefulness and propriety of these actions, however, is de-termined by their context. If done with any eye towards distancing andblame, then those taking these actions ought to be condemned as implicitlyapproving of violence against all Muslims. On the other hand, if these re-sponses are undertaken with an eye towards resisting the negative mean-ings attached to the racial group, the responses more effectively andpermanently resist subordination. Moreover, such responses would actu-ally contribute to the pursuit of racial justice because they would denouncethe “breadline” to American identity and acceptance.156

151. See Boswell & McConaghy, supra note 39.152. Ikemoto, supra note 38.153. Id.154. STEPHEN CORNELL & DOUGLAS HARTMANN, ETHNICITY AND RACE: MAKING IDENTI-

TIES IN A CHANGING WORLD 252 (1997). This response, Cornell and Hartmann explain, is notproblematic in itself, but instead has the potential to be so depending on “what kinds of ethnicand racial stories groups tell and how these stories are put to use.” Id. Thus, context matters.

155. He has also participated in the making of a film called “A Dream in Doubt,” which ismeant to address the paucity of discourse surrounding hate crimes against Sikhs in the post Sep-tember 11 period. See A Dream In Doubt, http://www.adreamindoubt.org/.

156. Ikemoto, supra note 38, at 1586 (Explaining that the “breadline” refers to a “social hier-archy” where it is assumed that “competition must occur among those forced to stand in line, notbetween those making the handouts and those subject to the handouts.”).



D. Resistance to Meanings Attached to the Category

In the aftermath of September 11, the initial Sikh response was to af-firm their ethnic, cultural and religious identity not only to protect againstattacks, but also to defend against a denial of their identity. Sikhs quicklyrealized the negative implications of such actions, as some engaged in “in-tense debate about . . . distinguishing themselves from Muslims while notimplying that attacks on Muslims are justified.”157 In addition, they recog-nized that “[i]t would be antithetical to [their] faith to have materials say-ing, ‘We are not Muslims’” and that Sikhs have to be “very careful” not tomake those claims.158 Thus, Sikhs were aware that targets ought to resistthe negative meanings attached to all racial categories in order to protectthe rights of their own and other racial groups.

The Sikh Coalition’s efforts to educate the public about Sikhism —within broader coalition building efforts opposing discrimination— is anexample of resistance to the negative meanings attached to racial catego-ries. The organization not only fought discrimination suits on behalf ofthose targeted after September 11, but also engaged in community wideadvocacy to change immigration policy and racial profiling.159 The “SikhAmerican Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF)” is engaged insimilar efforts that extend beyond protecting Sikh American’s civil rights togenerally combating discriminatory policies and profiling.160 The remain-der of Part IV.D discusses specific examples of this resistance by the Sikhcommunity to the incidents described above in Part IV.A.3, mainly (1)TSA’s turban screening policies, (2) the US Airway flight’s refusal to takeoff with Sikh members aboard, (3) the police actions against the Tagorefamily, and (4) the resistance to construction of the San Jose gurdwara.

First, in response to TSA’s screening policies, the Sikh Coalition andSALDEF educated TSA about Sikhism and assisted in developing morefair screening procedures. Through the campaign to educate the publicabout Sikhism, these organizations worked to dispel the beliefs that thesecommunity members are de facto terrorists or that Sikhs pose a greaterthreat than others, thereby combating the meanings associated with thegroup.

Second, in response to the recent U.S. Airways incident, the Sikh Coa-lition and SALDEF undertook similar public education efforts, combatingthe perception that South Asians with different appearances are foreignand therefore dangerous. Third, in response to the Houston police inci-dent, the Sikh Coalition not only contacted state and local officials to en-courage them to reprimand the officers, but also disseminated information

157. Goodstein & Lewin, supra note 122.158. Id.159. See, e.g. JUSTICE FOR ALL (The Sikh Coalition), Nov. 18, 2003, http://www.sikhcoalition.

org/NewsletterW11182003.asp.160. See, e.g. SALDEF Legislative Advocacy, http://www.saldef.org/content.aspx?z=11&a=

1430&title=Advocacy%20>>%20Legislative%20Advocacy



about the events and petitions to garner support.161 In doing so, the SikhCoalition also combated the negative perceptions and meanings attachedto Sikhs which —based on the officers’ mention of the Bombay bomb-ings— are foreignness, otherness,162 and affiliation with terrorism. The or-ganizations worked to effectively change the meanings associated with theracial category rather than argue that the victims of profiling should havebeen filtered into a different racial category.

Finally, the response to the San Jose Gurdwara construction was alsoan effort to resist the meanings attached to the category. In response toopposition against construction, Sikhs formed coalitions with several relig-ious groups and garnered the support of both South Asians and non-SouthAsians.163 This group collectively resisted Sikh characterization as disrup-tive, violent, and not belonging in this suburban neighborhood by clarifyingSikhism within a larger campaign to resist racism against minoritycommunities.

These responses take into account the “tape” used to measure targetsbut they do not re-inscribe the tools, categories, and meanings of the racialformation map as it currently exists and operates. Rather, in this context,double consciousness provides greater insight as to how one can respond tothe tools, categories, and meanings while fighting for racial equality overall.Double consciousness provides targets with the awareness of how they arebeing categorized and treated and encourages them to challenge the pro-cess leading to such treatment. These responses illustrate that the existingracial hierarchy can encourage targets to change the hierarchy, rather thansimply navigate within it.

V. CONCLUSION

By investigating the various ways Sikhs have historically responded totheir racialization, it becomes clear that some of those responses have beenboth detrimental and successful for the Sikh community and other commu-nities of color alike. First, arguing for different mapping tools can be prob-lematic because the recommended tools are often not better at resistingsubordination than existing ones. The proposed tools are sometimes thedirect result of the incentives of the racial hierarchy, disproportionatelysubordinating one group relative to another.164 Thind and the events ofSeptember 11 demonstrate that requesting new tools does not necessarilyeffectuate long-term change in terms of how Sikhs are perceived, classified,and treated because these tools —depending on context— can change overtime and be manipulated.

161. See supra note 134.162. For a brief discussion of otherness see John Tehranian, Unconscious Discrimination

Twenty Years Later: Application and Evolution Applying Unconscious Discrimination, 40 CTLR1201, 1205 (2008). (Per Rule 16.6.3, citing an individual article w/in a symposium.)

163. See supra note 130.164. Thind’s request for new tools, for example, was premised on the subordination of black

people.



Second, claiming that one has been placed in the wrong racial categorycan be dangerous because it may implicitly condone violence against mem-bers of the denied category. In addition, requesting a separate categoryimplicitly indicates that one group experienced racialization distinct fromother groups, which, given the interconnected nature of the racialization ofdifferent groups, is not likely. Requesting a separate category is also prob-lematic because it is a means for distancing oneself from, or placing oneselfabove, the rejected category. This is not only seen in the Sikhs’ responsesafter September 11, but also with the Chinese responses after the bombingof Pearl Harbor.165

This is not to say that Sikhs, or any identity group, ought to be com-pletely denied of the right to affirm their identity as a separate group. In-stead, Sikhs must be aware that such identity affirmation must be donewithout subordinating others, lest Sikhs recreate the breadline to resourcesrestricted by the racial hierarchy. There is also the concern that once Sikhs,and other groups, are given the space to create separate racial categories,this will be touted as “multiculturalism,”166 which problematically obscuresthe fact that real, lasting and institutionalized racism continues to exist. Inaddition, calling for separate and distinct categories may take resourcesaway from coalition building efforts. In light of the history presented inthis Note, it is not clear that requests for a separate racial category, orclaims that one has been placed into the wrong category, are effective indecreasing discrimination against these groups. Instead, it is more likelythat these responses have worked to perpetuate preexisting tension be-tween members of these groups.

Ultimately, resisting the meanings attached to the racial category is thebest means for assuring that one does not subordinate members of othercommunities of color. Specifically, resisting those meanings with an eyetowards improving the position of all people of color is most advantageous.Thus, context matters. Racial distancing, whether conducted by the Japa-nese upon immigration to the United States, Chinese after Pearl Harbor,African Americans in the Los Angeles Riots, or Sikhs after September 11,re-instantiates the racial hierarchy by deploying the same rhetoric and atti-tudes that inform and support the hierarchy. This is not to say that theseactors intentionally subordinate others solely as a result of their own im-pulses or even that they are always acting as individual, independent agentsin undertaking these responses. Instead, this Note argues that the racialstructure engenders such responses. Targets’ unawareness that these re-

165. The Chinese wore buttons reading “Chinese” or “Not from Nippon.” Boswell & McCon-aghy, supra note 39.

166. By multiculturalism, this Note means space for different minority groups to “affirm”their ethnic identity and celebrate that the ability to affirm it alongside other “ethnic” groups. Ithas been said that “multicultural discourse tends to essentialize minority cultures and ignore un-derlying power structures.” Race and Pedagogy Project, http://rpp.english.ucsb.edu/research/cat-egory/critical-race-theory-and-pedagogy/ (last visited Mar. 2, 2009).



sponses have the potential to continuously re-create this breadline167 togoods and to “American” identity may contribute to and strengthen thosestructures. If targets are able to change the meanings attached to the sub-ordinated categories then they are better able to combat the racial hierar-chy overall.

The racialization of Sikhs has been a process marked by essentialism,denial of identity, and mistaken identity. Sikh responses to this processaffect not only their own racialization, but also the racialization of otherminority groups. By realizing that these processes and experiences are in-terconnected, it becomes clear that the best means for Sikhs to combat thisracialization is to stay true to the founding principles of the Khalsa—tofight injustice everywhere.

167. Supra note 156.

Documents

Jasmine Singh