Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1640030
 


 



Marriage and Mestizaje, Chinese and Mexican: Constitutional Interpretation and Resistance in Sonora, 1921-1935


Kif Augustine-Adams


Brigham Young University - J. Reuben Clark Law School

July 14, 2010

Law & History Review, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2011

Abstract:     
In December 1923, the state congress in Sonora, Mexico, enacted Law 31, a pointed anti-miscegenation law that prohibited marriage between Mexican women and Chinese men. Although prejudice against Chinese in Sonora was long-standing, Law 31 marked a decided uptick in the use of law and legislation to discriminate against them. Mexican Chinese couples responded in kind: they challenged Law 31 in federal court, seeking amparo – judicial relief – against its enforcement. The petitions and public reaction to them tell a complex story about constitutional interpretation, judicial process, federalism and national identity, on the one hand, and race, gender, marriage and family, on the other.

At the lower federal court level, the nearly complete success of Chinese amparo petitions against Law 31 in 1924 and 1925 represented a short span of time when a handful of federal judges made real in the lives of a despised minority the promises of equality set forth in Mexico’s 1917 Constitution. The federal judges, and Arsenio Espinosa in particular, did so by strictly applying the law and, thus, asserting the supremacy of the federal Constitution over the ordinary legislation of the state of Sonora.

In contrast, the Second Chamber of the Mexican Supreme Court decided the Law 31 appeals it heard on other grounds: the proper allocation of legal authority. In the first case, the court considered what government entity could impose fines and punishments. In the second case, the court evaluated whether and how state authorities could regulate marriage. Through its decisions, the Second Chamber ultimately legitimated Sonora’s defiance of federal law and its state-sanctioned discrimination against Chinese. Marriage equality failed and with it some of the promise of the 1917 Constitution.

Keywords: legal history, Mexico, judiciary, marriage, antimiscegenation law, Chinese, race

Accepted Paper Series


Not Available For Download

Date posted: July 15, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Augustine-Adams, Kif, Marriage and Mestizaje, Chinese and Mexican: Constitutional Interpretation and Resistance in Sonora, 1921-1935 (July 14, 2010). Law & History Review, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1640030

Contact Information

Kif Augustine-Adams (Contact Author)
Brigham Young University - J. Reuben Clark Law School ( email )
430 JRCB
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 421

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.281 seconds