CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


UNITED STATES V. WONG YOU, 223 U. S. 67 (1912)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 223 U. S. 67 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Wong You, 223 U.S. 67 (1912)

United States v. Wong You

No. 597

Argued January 12, 1912

Decided January 22, 1912

223 U.S. 67

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

Syllabus

The Alien Immigration Act of February 20, 1907, c. 1134, 3, 34 Stat. 898, 908, applies to Chinese laborers illegally coming to this country notwithstanding the special acts relating to the exclusion of Chinese.

To allow a subsequent general act its literal effect does not repeal, alter, or amend an earlier special law when the later law expressly provides that it shall not have that effect.

The omission from a later act of a clause contained in an earlier act on the same subject, excluding certain classes from its operation chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 223 U. S. 68

and inserting a provision applicable to such classes, signifies that Congress intended to include that class in the operation of the later act notwithstanding the existence of other special legislation in regard thereto.

181 F.3d 3 reversed.

The facts, which involve the construction of § 36 of the Alien Immigration Act of 1907, are stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 223 U. S. 69

MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a writ of habeas corpus. It was dismissed by the district court, 176 Fed 933, but was sustained by the circuit court of appeals, which ordered the parties concerned to be discharged from custody. 181 F.3d 3. The parties are Chinamen who entered the United States surreptitiously, in a manner prohibited by the immigration act of February 20, 1907, c. 1134, § 36, 34 Stat. 898, 908, and the rules made in pursuance of the same, if applicable to Chinese. They were arrested in transitu and ordered by the Secretary of Commerce and Labor to be deported. §§ 20, 21. But, as it transpired in the evidence that they were laborers, the circuit court of appeals held that they could be dealt with only under the Chinese exclusion acts of earlier date. Those acts make it unlawful for any Chinese laborer to come from any foreign place into the United States, or, having so come, to remain there, and provide a different procedure for removing them. Hence, it was concluded that such persons were tacitly excepted from the general provisions of the immigration act, although broad enough to include them, and although of later date.

We are of opinion that the circuit court of appeals made a mistaken use of its principles of interpretation. By the language of the act, any alien that enters the country unlawfully may be summarily deported by order of the Secretary of Commerce and Labor at any time within three years. It seems to us unwarranted to except the Chinese from this liability because there is an earlier more cumbrous proceeding which this partially overlaps. The existence of the earlier laws only indicates the special solicitude of the government to limit the entrance of Chinese. It is the very reverse of a reason for denying to the government a better remedy against them alone of all the world, now that one has been created in general terms. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 223 U. S. 70

To allow the immigration act its literal effect does not repeal, alter, or amend the laws relating to the Chinese, as it is provided that it shall not, in § 43. The present act does not contain the clause found in the previous immigration act of March 3, 1893, 27 Stat. 569, c. 206, that it shall not apply to Chinese persons, and, on the other hand, as it requires deportation to the trans-Pacific ports from which such aliens embarked for the United States. § 35, it is rather hard to say that it has not the Chinese specially in mind.

Judgment reversed.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED