The welcome mat has never been an iron cast guarantee for the Irish in America. Indeed, it has been entirely absent at times. So – even as Irish America became secure, established and ultimately powerful – its membership retained a suspicion of government motives whenever the troubles of faraway Ireland entered the equation.
Suspicion begat outright complaint whenever the hand of a British government was discerned. Not that the hand was always needed – US administrations were more than capable of pulling the mat and shutting the door without prompting from their former colonial rulers.
In the wake of the 1798 rebellion in Ireland and the 1789 revolution in France, the Federalist Party, led by President John Adams, initiated laws designed to keep the troublesome Irish and French – raucous radicals and dangerous Jacobins that they were – outside the fledgling nation's borders.
"If some means are not adopted to prevent the indiscriminate admission of wild Irishmen and others to the right of suffrage," warned one leading legislator, Harrison Gray Otis, "there will soon be an end to liberty and property."
In response to such sentiment, the Federalist-controlled Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts. These were intended to reduce Irish and French immigration by increasing the waiting period for naturalisation from five to 14 years.
In a hint of things to come two centuries later, the acts also allowed for the detention of subjects of enemy countries, allowed for the expulsion of any 'dangerous' alien, and made it a crime to write or utter anything 'with the intent to defame' the government.
The acts prompted a deep schism in the nation's political discourse.
With the arrival of the 'democratic republican' Thomas Jefferson in the White House, however, the days of the Alien and Sedition Acts were numbered. But the attitudes contained in them survived long after and some would argue that the acts have found new voice and effect in the USA Patriot Act, the legislation that formed the Bush administration's main internal legal response to the 9/11 terrorist attack on America.
A great many Irish Americans, however, would quibble little with the Patriot Act, or its newly proposed successor, the Victory Act. Many Irish Americans would see themselves as staunch law-and-order proponents, Republican voters and cheerleaders for just about every word that President Bush utters on the subject of the war on terror and defence of the homeland.
Throw in the British government, however, and clear water becomes muddied.
So it's no surprise that a proposed new extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom is arousing the concern of a largely conservative body such as the Ancient Order of Hibernians.
The Hibernians – as red, white and blue as you'll get in an American domestic context – fear that the treaty could be used against Irish American activities linked to the political situation in Northern Ireland.
The treaty was signed with little fanfare by US Attorney General John Ashcroft and British Home Secretary David Blunkett on March 31. It awaits final ratification by the US Senate before becoming law.
A the signing, Mr Ashcroft made no specific reference to any conflict, group or country.
"The United Kingdom and the United States have a long cooperative history in law enforcement that has only been strengthened since the tragedy of September 11. Our two countries are united in our mutual respect for the rule of law and love of freedom," Mr Ashcroft said.
He added: "Our new extradition treaty will give us more flexibility and efficiency in ensuring that fugitive criminals can be brought to justice in the country whose laws they have violated and whose people and institutions they have harmed.
"The treaty covers criminal conduct from white collar crime and fraud, to organised crime, money laundering, and terrorism. The new treaty we are signing today should serve as a model to the world for successful and efficient cooperation in bringing international fugitives to justice."
However, the Hibernians and other Irish-American groups, though all staunch backers of the Good Friday Agreement, are saying that they clearly discern the Northern Ireland conflict between the treaty's lines.
The Hibernians have initiated an internet petition intended to reflect Irish-American concern over what some lawyers argue is an instrument aimed at Irish-American involvement in the north.
During the recent AOH state convention in Rochester, New York, 300 delegates signed a petition that was forwarded to New York's Senate members, Charles Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The petition stated that the treaty "could place Irish-American activists in great peril."
Those concerns have already been reflected by, among others, Francis Boyle, a professor of law at the University of Illinois.
According to Boyle, the proposed treaty not only does away with the concept of a political exception clause, it also removes the possibility of judicial review in extradition cases while exposing individuals, including US citizens, to the threat of extradition to the United Kingdom based on "totally unfounded allegations''.
"People could be prosecuted for simply helping people involved in the situation in Northern Ireland," Boyle said.
"The UK government does not need this treaty to get Real or Continuity IRA people. They already can under the current treaty. This treaty is really aimed at shutting down Irish-American organisations and individuals," Mr Boyle argued.
He said he is fearful that the British government is using the new treaty to position itself in the event of the Good Friday Agreement collapsing.
"I hope it does not, but if it does, God forbid, any Irish American who gives any support can be immediately shut down, even by totally unfounded allegations. I think the real target is Irish America," he said.
Irish America has duly taken note.
