Throughout American history, the most consequential restrictions on human rights have rarely emerged from sudden bursts of cruelty or spontaneous legislative malice. Instead, they have been preceded by something more methodical and more insidious, namely the careful construction of a linguistic framework that renders exclusion not merely acceptable, but administratively logical. Dehumanization, in its most effective form, functions less as overt brutality and more as the bureaucratic groundwork that makes certain populations thinkable as subjects of restriction rather than bearers of rights. Once a group has been framed through sustained rhetoric as biologically deficient, inherently dangerous, or fundamentally outside the boundaries of civic belonging, the policies that follow appear not as acts of aggression but as necessary measures of regulation and public order. The language does not merely accompany the law; it constructs the conceptual architecture that makes the law seem inevitable.