Correlation between citizenship and labor patterns has been close with the American history. America was founded on the firm principles of white control and those who would participate in the government would enjoy freedom (Susan, 21). Similarly, the nationality status is tied to the labor status and this implies that, those without citizenship rights are limited to formation of unions, compete for jobs and achieve higher education.Bringing labor and citizenship into the same platform, this study considers the practices at the local level. For instance, the labor markets are localized in a physically restricted area. Treating nationality as being determined by the American constitution and statutes, does not add value to the minority because the problem occurs when enforcing these documents. According to Lipsitz (54), he asserts that the advantages of Africans and other color people with reduce the happiness of the whites. In addition, Lipsitz’s possessive investment in whiteness is fundamental for the whites. On the same regard, racism is evidenced in 1971, when whites used dynamite to blow up school buses to prevent desegregation. It is imperative to note that, the formal documents define boundaries and rights, nevertheless, the state actors that operate at the local level choose not to respect the law and enhance racial and gender prejudice (Susan, 23). For instance, a movie theater owner makes a decision to of not allowing an African or Mexican American to sit in the main dais. This behavior enhances segregation silently. Such localized and face-to-face prejudiced practices determine whether people are free in a nation that professes democracy and justice for all. This is a contradiction to the expected equal milieu for everyone in spite of color, gender or race.
Labor particularly, in work places is closely attributed to gender discrimination, particularly, the women. Despite the women’s rights movements, which have over years agitated for equal treatment of women and enhancing awareness, enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act, women are still seized back in working places and they have continued to encounter serious obstacles to equal job opportunities (Susan, 42). Passing over jobs, promotions, sexual harassment and less pay characterize the position of