Talk:California Alien Land Law of 1913

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

California

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Asian Americans Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Asian Americans (assessed as Low-importance).

California wasn't the only one to have Alien Land Laws[edit]

Talk:Alien_Land_Law

Could we please change Alien Land Law from a redirect page to a seperate article? 169.229.121.94 05:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made it into a disambige page, but I really think it would be better if all similar laws were handled in one article. // 213.89.53.155 (talk) 06:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

error in dating Sei Fujii v. California[edit]

The California Supreme Court decided the case in 1952--not in 1946, as the article indicates. Indeed, plaintiff only purchased the real estate at issue in the case in 1948. See Sei Fujii v. California, 38 Cal. 2d 718; 242 P.2d 617; 1952 Cal. LEXIS 221 (April 17, 1952) (challenging the California Alien Land Law, Cal. Gen. Laws, Act 261, §§ 1, 2, and 7 (1945))

Duplicate?[edit]

Webb-Haney Act. Oyama v. California should be mentioned... AnonMoos (talk) 12:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"ineligible aliens"?[edit]

Nowhere is this explained in the article. No (obvious) link either. How/why were they ineligible? --jae (talk) 13:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning One Of The Assertions[edit]

What is the basis for the statement -- "Implicitly, the law was primarily directed at the Japanese?"

The article indicates the law was enacted against Japanese, Chinese, Korean and Indian immigrants. The assertion that it was "implicitly" "primarily" directed against Japanese immigrants is unsupported, and therefore seems implicitly biased and divisive. Presumably the law affected Japanese, Chinese, Korean and Indian immigrants. Why were these other categories included in the law if the law was not "primarily" meant to include them? Puckanuck (talk) 23:31, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese were often perceived as the most active threat in buying up land and potentially competing with white famers. Anyway, some white Californians may not have distinguished clearly (or cared to distinguish) between Japanese and Koreans at that time, since Japan had annexed Korea. AnonMoos (talk) 08:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. It says further down in the article: "specifically at the Japanese, who had become a strong presence in the agricultural labor market as well as in the control of farms". AnonMoos (talk) 08:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]