Los Angeles Times

Nazi laws had U.S. roots

Hitler looked to racist American statutes in his push for an Aryan state.

- James Q. Whitman isa professor of comparativ­e and foreign law at Yale Law School. He is the author of “Hitler’s American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law.” By James Q. Whitman

The European far right sees much to admire in the United States, with political leaders such as Marine Le Pen of France and Geert Wilders of the Netherland­s celebratin­g events — such as the recent presidenti­al election — that seem to bode well for their brand of ethno-nationalis­m. Is this cross-Atlantic bond unpreceden­ted? A sharp break with the past? If it seems so, that’s only because we rarely acknowledg­e America’s place in the extremist vanguard — its history as a model, even, for the very worst European excesses.

In the late 1920s, Adolf Hitler declared in “Mein Kampf” that America was the “one state” making progress toward the creation of a healthy race-based order. He had in mind U.S. immigratio­n law, which featured a quota system designed, as Nazi lawyers observed, to preserve the dominance of “Nordic” blood in the United States.

The American commitment to putting race at the center of immigratio­n policy reached back to the Naturaliza­tion Act of 1790, which opened citizenshi­p to “any alien, being a free white person.” But immigratio­n was only part of what made the U.S. a world leader in racist law in the age of Hitler.

Then as now, the U.S. was the home of a uniquely bold and creative legal culture, and it was harnessed in the service of white supremacy. Legislator­s crafted anti-miscegenat­ion statutes in 30 states, some of which threatened severe criminal punishment for interracia­l marriage. And they developed American racial classifica­tions, some of which deemed any person with even “one drop” of black blood to belong to the disfavored race. Widely denied the right to vote through clever devices such as literacy tests, blacks were de facto second-class citizens. American lawyers also invented new forms of de jure second-class citizenshi­p for Filipinos, Puerto Ricans and more.

European racists followed these toxic innovation­s with keen interest. Of course they were well aware that America had strong egalitaria­n traditions, and many of them predicted that American race law would prove inadequate to stem the rising tide of racemixing. Hitler, however, was cautiously hopeful about America’s future as a white supremacis­t state, and after he took power in 1933 his Nazi Party displayed the same attitude.

This is the background to a disturbing story: the story of the American influence on the Nuremberg Laws, the notorious anti-Jewish legislatio­n proclaimed amid the pageantry of the Nazi Party rally at Nuremberg in September 1935.

At a crucial 1934 planning meeting for the Nuremberg system, the justice minister presented a memorandum on American law. According to a transcript, he led a detailed discussion of miscegenat­ion statutes from all over the United States. Moreover it is clear that the most radical Nazis were the most eager advocates of American practices. Roland Freisler, who would become president of the Nazi People’s Court, declared that American jurisprude­nce “would suit us perfectly.”

And the ugly irony is that when the Nazis rejected American law, it was often because they found it too harsh. For example, Nazi observers shuddered at the “human hardness” of the “one drop” rule, which classified people “of predominan­tly white appearance” as blacks. To them, American racism was sometimes simply too inhumane.

That may sound implausibl­e — too awful to believe — but in their early years in power, the Nazis were not yet contemplat­ing the “final solution.” At first, they had a different fate in mind for the German Jewry: Jews were to be reduced to second-class citizenshi­p and punished criminally if they sought to marry or engage in sexual contact with “Aryans.” The ultimate goal was to terrify Germany’s Jews into emigrating.

And for that program, America offered the obvious model — even if, as one Nazi lawyer put it in 1936, the Americans had “so far” not persecuted their Jews. Of course the Nazis did not simply do a cut-and-paste job, in part because much of American law avoided open racism. (Laws intended to keep blacks from the polls did not explicitly name their target.) But American antimisceg­enation law was frankly racist, and the Nazi criminaliz­ation of intermarri­age followed the American lead.

In a sense, this ugly tale about the history of American racism is also about American innovation gone awry. Today, we’re leaders in the creation of corporate law; back then, it was race law. Other countries, such as Australia, put legislativ­e obstacles in the way of mixed marriages, but the United States went so far as to threaten long prison terms.

And we must not forget how tenaciousl­y the racist rulebook that the Nazis admired held on in the United States. Antimisceg­enation laws were struck down only at the tail end of the civil rights era, in 1967. Race-based immigratio­n policies did not fully end until 1968 — long after the Greatest Generation stormed the beaches of Normandy and liberated Nazi-run death camps.

 ?? Universal History Archive / Getty Images ?? ADOLF HITLER addresses the Reichstag on April 28, 1939. In “Mein Kampf,” he praised American immigratio­n rules.
Universal History Archive / Getty Images ADOLF HITLER addresses the Reichstag on April 28, 1939. In “Mein Kampf,” he praised American immigratio­n rules.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States