Schwimmer was unable to take the oath of allegiance to become a naturalized citizen. She
was born in Hungary and while in the United States to deliver a lecture decided that she
wanted to become a citizen. When asked if she would be willing to take up arms in
defense of her country she responded in the negative. She stated that she believed in
the democratic ideal but asserted that she was an uncompromising pacifist. “My 'cosmic
consciousness of belonging to the human family' is shared by all those who believe that
all human beings are the children of God.”
In an 8-1 decision, the Court ruled that it was proper for Schwimmer’s application for
citizenship be denied.
|
Majority Opinion: (Justice Butler) |
The government has established statutes regulating who can become naturalized citizens
because of the benefits it brings. “Because of the great value of the privileges
conferred by naturalization, the statutes prescribing qualifications and governing
procedure for admission are to be construed with definite purpose to favor and support
the government. And, in order to safeguard against admission of those who are unworthy,
or who for any reason fail to measure up to required standards, the law puts the burden
upon every applicant to show by satisfactory evidence that he has the specified
qualifications.” The Court accepts the importance the government has assigned to being
able to compel military service of its citizens if necessary. “And their opinions and
beliefs as well as their behavior indicating a disposition to hinder in the performance
of that duty are subjects of inquiry under the statutory provisions governing
naturalization and are of vital importance, for if all or a large number of citizens
oppose such defense the 'good order and happiness' of the United States cannot long
endure.” The pacifism that Schwimmer professes may hinder her ability to develop the
nationalism that the country attempts to foster. The reason for her pacifism is
immaterial because she is not yet a citizen who possesses the rights of citizenship that
allow for conscientious objection.
The Court places great emphasis on the interest of the state to foster feelings of
nationalism. It is proper for the country to prevent people who espouse feelings
contrary to the nation’s interests from the privilege of naturalization.
Copyright © The Religious Freedom Page.
|
