Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-859new_kjfm.pdf
Page Number: 20

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

15 

Opinion of the Court 

Pursuant to the warrant, the Government eventually seized 
and sold a plot of the collector’s land.  Id., at 274.  Plaintiffs 
later attacked the purchaser’s title, arguing that the initial
seizure was void because the Government had audited the 
collector’s account and issued the warrant itself without ju-
dicial involvement.  Id., at 275. 

The Court upheld the sale.  It explained that pursuant to
its power to collect revenue, the Government could rely on 
“summary proceedings” to compel its officers to “pay such
balances of the public money” into the Treasury “as may be 
in  their  hands.”  Id.,  at  281,  285.    Indeed,  the  Court  ob-
served,  there  was  an  unbroken  tradition—long  predating 
the  founding—of  using  these  kinds  of  proceedings  to  “en-
force  payment  of  balances  due  from  receivers  of  the  reve-
nue.”  Id., at 278; see id., at 281.  In light of this historical
practice, the Government could issue a valid warrant with-
out  intruding  on  the  domain  of  the  Judiciary.    See  id.,  at 
280–282.  The challenge to the sale thus lacked merit. 

This principle extends beyond cases involving the collec-
tion  of  revenue. 
In  Oceanic  Steam  Navigation  Co.  v. 
Stranahan, 214 U. S. 320 (1909), we considered the imposi-
tion of a monetary penalty on a steamship company.  Pur-
suant to its plenary power over immigration, Congress had 
excluded immigration by aliens afflicted with “loathsome or
dangerous contagious diseases,” and it authorized customs 
collectors to enforce the prohibition with fines.  Id., at 331– 
334.  When  a  steamship  company  challenged  the  penalty 
under Article III, we upheld it.  Congress’s power over for-
eign commerce, we explained, was so total that no party had 
a “ ‘vested right’ ” to import anything into the country.  Id., 
at 335 (quoting Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470, 493 
(1904)).  By  the  same  token,  Congress  could  also  prohibit 
immigration by certain classes of persons and enforce those 
prohibitions  with  administrative  penalties  assessed  with-
out a jury.  See Oceanic Steam Navigation Co., 214 U. S., at