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.