Racial classification of Indian Americans

In 1923, the Supreme Court decided in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind that while Indians were classified as Caucasians by anthropologists, people of Indian descent were not white by common American definition, and thus not eligible to citizenship.[11] The court conceded that, while Thind was a high caste Hindu born in the northern Punjab region and classified by certain scientific authorities as of the Aryan race, he was not "White" since the word Aryan "has to do with linguistic and not necessarily with physical characteristics" and since "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences" between Indians and white Americans. The court also clarified that the decision did not reflect or imply anything related to racial superiority or inferiority, but merely an observable difference.[12]

At the time, this decision began the process of retroactively stripping Indians of citizenship and land rights. The ruling also placated the Asiatic Exclusion League demands, spurned by growing outrage at the Turban Tide / Hindoo Invasion (sic) alongside the pre-existing outrage at the Yellow Peril. As they became classified as colored, Indian Americans were not only denied American citizenship, but also banned by anti-miscegenation laws from marrying white Americans in the states of Arizona, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia.[13]

Following the Thind case, the Bureau of Naturalization began action to strip Thind and other Indian-Americans of their citizenship, arguing it had been "illegally procured."[14] However, these efforts were forced to end by the government's loss in court in the case against Thind's own lawyer, a Californian named Sakharam Ganesh Pandit. By the time Pandit's case came to trial in 1926, forty-two of sixty-nine citizenships granted to Indians had been revoked.[15][16] Pandit, a skilled lawyer, argued that under the doctrine of equitable estoppel, he would be irreversibly harmed by the revocation of his American citizenship, which he had reasonably relied upon - he would become stateless, lose his property and law license, and his wife would lose her citizenship as well.[14]

Judge Paul McCormick, the initial trial judge, ruled in Pandit's favor, accepting his arguments wholeheartedly. In 1927, the Ninth Circuit upheld McCormick's ruling under the doctrine of res judicata.[14][17] As a result of Pandit's case, the US government subsequently dropped its other denaturalization cases against Indian-Americans.[16][18]

In 1935, Thind relied on his status as a veteran of the United States military during World War I to petition for naturalization through the State of New York under the Nye-Lea Act, which made World War I veterans eligible for naturalization regardless of race. The government objected his latest petition, but Thind was finally granted American citizenship; yet the Government attempted to revoke it after nearly two decades from his first petition for naturalization.[19]

In 1946, Congress, beginning to recognize that India would soon be independent, passed a new law that allowed Indians to become citizens, while also establishing an immigration quota.[12]

In 1993, Dale Sandhu, an East Indian whose origin is from the Punjab, took his former employer, Lockheed, to court on grounds of wrongful dismissal due to racial grounds. Lockheed attempted to counter Sandhu's claims by stating he is Caucasian, so he cannot allege discrimination based on race. In 1993, the California Superior Court Judge overseeing the case initially accepted Lockheed's view. [20][21] However in 1994, the California Sixth District Court of Appeals reversed the 1993 decision for Dale Sandhu. Lockhead argued that the "common popular understanding that there are three major human races — Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid." The Court of Appeals denied this 19th century classification of race, stating that Indian people are a distinct ethnic group of their own. According to United States Census, "Asian Indian" is considered on of the distinct 15 races. The Court of Appeals affirmed that Sandhu was subject to discriminatory hostility, based on being a member of a distinct racial group. The Court of Appeals said that Sandhu could make a claim of racial discrimination under FEHA within the jurisdiction of the Court.

In 2015, in Dhar v. New York City Department of Transportation, Dhar, a former employee and a Christian Bangladeshi, alleged a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, based on his race, religion, and national origin. He alleged that his former supervisor, a Hindu Gujarati, illegally favored other Hindu Indian/Gujarati employees. The court dismissed the claim.[22][23]

The U.S. Census Bureau has changed over the years its own classification of Indians. In the 1930 and 1940 censuses, "Hindu" was listed as a racial category.[24] During the 1970s, Indian Americans advocated for an Asian Indian category to be created.[25]

In 1989, the East–West Center published a research paper about Indian Americans that said that the term, "Asian Indian," one of the fourteen "Races" in the 1980 US Census, is an "artificial census category and not a meaningful racial, ethnic, or ancestral designation."

On the US Census, Indians display the highest likelihood of selecting the 'African-American or black’ category, while Sri Lankans followed by Pakistanis are most likely to describe themselves as 'white'.[2] The 1990 U.S. Census classified write-in responses of "Aryan" as white even though write-in responses of "Indo-Aryan" were counted as Asian, and the 1990 US Census classified write-in responses of "Parsi" under Iranian American, who are classified as White along with Arab Americans and other Middle Eastern Americans.[26] The Asian American Institute proposed that the 2000 US Census make a new Middle Easterner racial category and the Punjabi from Pakistan wanted Pakistani Americans to be included in it.[27]

Some Indian Americans who were unfamiliar with the ethnonymic conventions used in the United States, mistakenly indicated that they were "American Indian" as their race in the 1990 US Census, because they were unaware that this term is used in the United States to refer to Native Americans.[2]

Indian independence movement fighter Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay wrote of the Indian racial identity in America as being Black.[29] After spending years studying and living with African-American families, Chattopadhyay wrote Indians in America should form ties with African-Americans as they shared a common ancestry and a common struggle for independence.[30]

However, South Asians often attempt to be identified as white in order to try to distance themselves from African-Americans and Hispanics.[2] Even though South Asians "insist on being called 'brown', the plea of Indian immigrants not to be called black is what is most audible".[31] This is due to considerable anti-blackness and anti-Hispanic prejudice in some segments of the South Asian population. This prejudice is often accompanied by a fear of being mistaken for Black or Hispanic, described as "an almost paranoid response to even being thought of as black".[32]

Nikki Haley, the Indian American governor of South Carolina, whose parents are from Punjab in Northwest India, identified as 'white' on her voter registration card in 2001.[33] Haley's behavior reflects a historic trend among lighter skinned people of color in America, called white passing. Dick Harpootlian, chairman of the South Carolina Democrats, stated “Haley has been appearing on television interviews where she calls herself a minority—when it suits her... When she registers to vote she says she is white. She has developed a pattern of saying whatever is beneficial to her at the moment.”[34]

The official classification of South Asians as part of the Asian racial category represents an agreement of convenience for South Asians on where they fit on the racially divided black-white spectrum in America.[2] South Asian Americans and other types of Asian Americans mutually feel that there exists "profound racial difference" between themselves and the other Asian ethnic group. Furthermore, "Working-class or state school-educated second generation Indian Americans do not see a natural alliance or unity with other Asian American groups."[2]

In 1989, the East–West Center published a research paper about Indian Americans that said that Americans find identifying South Asians by race and color to be difficult. The paper said that a 1978 survey of Americans asked the question, "Would you classify most people from India as being white, black, or something else?" The paper said that 38% of respondents classified most people from India as "other," 23% classified them as "brown," 15% classified them as "black," 13% did not know how to classify them, and 11% classified them as "white."[35]

In 2000, a series of interviews of second-generation Asian American college student leaders found that most of the interviewees who did not include Indian Americans as Asian Americans did not express a clear reason that was more than perceived difference in physical appearance and culture.[36]

Indian Americans have often been misidentified as Arabs or Middle Eastern, particularly after the September 11 attacks.[37] Assaults against turban-wearing Sikhs have become common since 9/11, due to Sikh turbans resembling the turban that Osama Bin Laden often wore in pictures.[38][39] After her win in 2013, Miss America winner Nina Davuluri was taunted online and called an "Arab" and a "terrorist" due to this misconception among the American public.[40]

In 2015, Sureshbhai Patel was described by a suspicious caller as a "skinny black guy" before he was beaten and severely injured by Alabama police officers.[41]

A 2017 book about Indian Americans said that Indians and other South Asians are a part of Asian Americans, yet apart from Asian Americans, and admitted among Asian Americans, but not acknowledged among Asian Americans. It said that Asian Americans most suitable characterization for Indians and other South Asians might be "ambiguously nonwhite."[42]