The long arc
Year-by-year
| Year | California | Rest of US | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1850 | 25% | 10% | +15 |
| 1860 | 40% | 14% | +26 |
| 1870 | 40% | 14% | +26 |
| 1880 | 37% | 14% | +23 |
| 1890 | 33% | 15% | +18 |
| 1900 | 27% | 14% | +13 |
| 1910 | 27% | 15% | +12 |
| 1920 | 22% | 13% | +9 |
| 1930 | 22% | 12% | +10 |
| 1940 | 17% | 10% | +7 |
| 1950 | 14% | 9% | +5 |
| 1960 | 13% | 7% | +6 |
| 1970 (trough) | 10% | 8% | +2 |
| 1980 | 20% | 9% | +11 |
| 1990 | 33% | 11% | +22 |
| 2000 | 35% | 13% | +22 |
| 2010 | 35% | 16% | +19 |
| 2024 | 35% | 19% | +16 |
Fair housing implications
The FHA era (1950s-70s) was anomalous
The Johnson-Reed Quotas of 1924 suppressed immigration for four decades. Hart-Celler 1965 reopened the doors — but the 1968 Fair Housing Act was written during the trough, not during a typical immigrant era.
California's 22 protected classes aren't new
They're the product of 150+ years of immigrant experience: Chinese Exclusion 1882, Alien Land Laws 1913, racial covenants, and WWII Japanese internment all happened here — and shaped today's law.
Immigration-status protection makes sense
...in a state historically this immigrant. California's FEHA addition of immigration status as a protected class is legal catch-up to demographic reality, not an outlier policy.
Rest of US is 30-40 years behind CA's curve
At ~19% foreign-born in 2024, the rest of the country is approaching CA's 1990 level. The demographic pressures — and the fair housing complaints — will follow. CA is the leading indicator.
Gold Rush era (1860-1880) had more immigrants per capita than today. The 1950s-70s weren't "classic America" — they were a dip caused by restrictive 1924 quota laws.
Source: Census Bureau decennial censuses (1850-2000), American Community Survey 2008-2012 5-Year Estimates, and 2024 1-Year Estimates, PPIC.