Document: 345 U.S. 206 73 S.Ct. 625 97 L.Ed. 956 SHAUGHNESSY, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization,v.UNITED STATES ex rel. MEZEI. No. 139. Argued Jan. 7 8, 1953. Decided March 16, Mr. Ross L. Malone, Jr., Roswell, N.M., for petitioner. Jack Wasserman, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion Court. 1 This case concerns an alien immigrant permanently excluded from United States on security grounds but stranded in his temporary haven Ellis Island because other countries will not take him back. The issue is whether Attorney General's continued exclusion respondent without a hearing amounts to unlawful detention, so that courts may admit temporarily bond until arrangements are made departure abroad. After respondent's petition writ habeas corpus, Court held authorized admission $5,000 bond.1 Appeals affirmed action, directed reconsideration terms parole.2 Accordingly, entered modified order reducing $3,000 permitting travel reside Buffalo, New York. Bond was posted released. Because resultant serious problems enforcement immigration laws, we granted certiorari. 344 809, 25. 2 Respondent's present dilemma springs these circumstances: Though, as observed, '(t)here certain vagueness about (his) history', seemingly born Gibraltar Hungarian or Rumanian parents lived 1923 1948.3 In May year he sailed Europe, apparently visit dying mother Rumania. Denied entry there, remained Hungary some 19 months, due 'difficulty securing exit permit.' Finally, armed with quota visa issued by American Consul Budapest, proceeded France boarded Ile de Le Havre bound Upon arrival February 9, 1950, inspector acting pursuant Passport Act amended regulations thereunder. Pending disposition received at Island. reviewing evidence, General 10, ordered be permanent before board special inquiry, 'basis information confidential nature, disclosure which would prejudicial public interest.' That determination rested finding interest reasons. But thus far all attempts effect have failed: Twice shipped out return whence came; Great Britain refused permission land. State Department has unsuccessfully negotiated readmission. Respondent personally applied dozen Latin turned down. So June 1951 advised Naturalization Service exert no further efforts depart. short, sat this country shut others were unwilling in. 3 Asserting confinement Island, sought relief through series corpus proceedings. four unsuccessful part, Southern York November 1951, sustained writ. Judge, vexed problem 'an who place go', did question validity deemed 'detention' after 21 months excessive justifiable only affirmative proof danger safety. When Government declined divulge such even camera, conditional parole bond.4 By divided vote, affirmed. Postulating power hold could never broader than remove 'continue alien's beyond moment when deportation becomes patently impossible deprive liberty', court found 'confinement' longer means removal elsewhere, statute, violation process.5 Judge Learned Hand, dissenting, took different view: one 'exclusion' 'deportation'; transfer ship shore conferred additional rights; fact, situated 'can force us all.'6 4 Courts long recognized expel exclude aliens fundamental sovereign attribute exercised Government's political departments largely immune judicial control. Chinese Exclusion Case (Chae Chan Ping v. States), 1889, 130 581, 9 623, 32 1068; Fong Yue Ting States, 1893, 149 698, 13 1016, 37 905; Knauff Shaughnessy, 338 537, 70 309, 94 317; Harisiades 1952, 342 580, 72 512, 96 586. exercise powers, Congress expressly President impose restrictions entering leaving during periods international tension strife. authorization, originally enacted 1918, continues emergency. Under it, General, President, whose 'entry States'.7 And based interest.8 accord provisions; necessary determinations barred States. 5 It true once passed our gates, illegally, expelled proceedings conforming traditional standards fairness encompassed process law. Japanese Immigrant (Kaoru Yamataya Fisher), 1903, 189 86, 100—101, 23 611, 614, 47 721; Wong Yang Sung McGrath, 339 33, 49—50, 445, 453—454, 616; Kwong Hai Chew Colding, 1953, 590, 598, 472, 478. threshold initial stands footing: 'Whatever procedure is, it denied concerned.' supra, page 544, 313; Nishimura Ekiu 1892, 142 651, 660, 12 336, 338, 35 1146. action executive officer under authority final conclusive, cannot compelled disclose evidence underlying case; 'it within province any court, unless law, review branch Government'. 543, 312; 338. this, retry General. 546, 314; Ludecke Watkins, 1948, 335 160, 171—172, 68 1429, 1434, 1435, 92 1881. 6 Neither harborage nor prior residence here transforms into something proceeding. Concededly, movements restrained test exclusion. enjoys refuge land, remains continuously aboard ship. Jung Ah Lung, 1888, 124 621, 626, 8 663, 665, 31 591; Chin Yow 1908, 208 12, 28 201, 202, 52 369. sum, Kaplan Tod, 1925, 267 228, 230, 45 257, 69 585; Ju Toy, 1905, 198 253, 263, 25 644, 646, 49 1040; 661, 339. For purposes moreover, legal incidents remain unaltered been not. He just same, if unqualified existing laws. E.g., Lem Moon Sing 1895, 158 538, 547—548, 15 967, 970—971, 39 1082; Polymeris Trudell, 1932, 284 279, 143, 76 291. To sure, lawful resident captiously deprived constitutional rights procedural process. 601, 479; Cf. Delgadillo Carmichael, 1947, 332 388, 17. Only day circumstances absence shores constitutionally returning lawfully right heard. supra. Chew, seaman admitted signed articles maritime employment chief steward vessel registry home port City. Though cleared Coast Guard voyage, sea 'excluded' grounds. On facts case, including reference § 307(d)(2) Nationality 1940, U.S.C.A. 707(d)(2), felt justified 'assimilating' status residents entitled hearings least administrative tribunal. Id., pages 596, 599—601, 477—480. escape conflict authorizing cases inappicable protected Fifth Amendment. 600, 479. history drastically differs disclosed Chew's case. Unlike full clearance documentation pursued vocation ship, respondent, authorization reentry papers,9 simply left behind Iron Curtain months. Moreover, while 307 1940 regards service continuous naturalization purposes, section deems protracted clear break here.10 circumstances, difficulty holding entrant 'assimilated (that) status' purposes. 599, being so, emergency promulgated Act. Nor need upon rests. 317. There Aliens seeking contiguous lands obviously can back border more. While might keep entrants pending their admissibility, resulting hardships inconvenience carrier persuaded adopt more generous course. statute authorized, aliens' shore.11 harborage, act legislative grace, bestows rights. meticulously specified shelter ashore 'shall considered landing' relieve duty transport ultimately excluded.12 affecting status; treated stopped border. 661—662, 339, 1146; v 585. 10 Thus do think deprives statutory right. detained expeditious consummation released discretion subject review. Carlson Landon, 524, 525, 547. uprooted midst rejoin community effects leave.13 An proceeding grounded national security, however, presents considerations; neither rationale release exists.14 Ordinarily nullifies very purpose proceeding; 1950 include statute.15 plus nations inhospitality results hardship ignored. But, times what they are, well ought shift onus us; position ours theirs. Whatever individual estimate policy fears rests, enter depends congressional will, substitute judgment mandate. 590—591, 519, 11 Reversed. BLACK, whom DOUGLAS concurs, dissenting. Mezei came York, twenty-five years. trip Europe 1948 1950. Without charge conviction crime, two years prisoner wanted go wife Buffalo. defended imprisonment alleging dangerous Nation's let bail. Asked answered judge 'of nature' much telling names secret informers jeopardize safety Nation. Finding Mezei's life Buffalo had 'unexceptional' proven justify imprisonment, approved. Now orders leave island prison stay indefinitely, maybe life. 14 JACKSON forcefully points Court's liberty completely mercy unreviewable I join belief violates No society free where government makes person's depend arbitrary another. Dictatorships done since time immemorial. They now. Russian laws 1934 People's Commissariat imprison, banish exile citizens 'foreign subjects socially dangerous.'* Hitler's police given like powers. German forbidden make inquiry whatever acted. Our Bill Rights written prevent oppressive practices. Nation fostered freedom. Founders abhorred one-man imprisonments. Their was—our principles person faith, rich poor, high low, native foreigner, white colored, life, property taken 'without law.' me federal prosecutors governmental official, title, put people accountability justice. too highly prized allow officials imprison basis kept courts. should indefinitely except result fair open appraised prosecutor. 16 JACKSON, FRANKFURTER joins, 17 Fortunately still startling, country, find custody accusation crime trial. Executive lawless John, Runnymede, pledged man imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled save peers law judges England developed preserve immunities restraint. best tradition Anglo-American deny unconvicted keep, theory, outside gates. Lord Mansfield, celebrated slavery unknown common England, ran favor alien, African Negro slave, against master anchor Thames.1 I. 18 What case?2 contemplation agree, asks country. Concretely, law-abiding inhabitant quarter century, ago residence, seeks home. foreign aged ailing prolonged disturbed conditions Eastern obtained consul returned honor documents menace security. man, seems led unrelieved insignificance, must astonished himself suddenly putting fear afraid tell why him. reshipped France, twice landing. declined, European willing its doors Twelve Hemisphere applications. Since proclaimed Samson pull down pillars temple, surprised peoples less prosperous, strongly established stable feared off timorous hands. With record unwanted those promise abiding place. nearly authorities way likely perhaps cause known Is liberty? answers 'transferred August 1, safekeeping,' 'is usual sense, solely gaining depart choice.' counsel ingeniously argued 'refuge' direction west. mean freedom, amphibian! Realistically, incarcerated combination forces keeps effectually prison, dominant proximate authority. overworks fiction say commonest sense bound. Despite impeccable logic argument point, leads artificial unreal conclusion.3 We regard liberty, deprivation denial 20 point argues 'no States'; 'the sees fit grant proceedings'; so-called detention merely continuation specifically Congress'; restraint incidental (of exclusion) itself effectuation order, there limit continuance' statutory, all. adopts words responsible administration testified committee applicant, 'He rights.'4 interpretations Amendment's command shall come this: reasonable general legislation reasonably individual. compatible tests substance procedure. 22 II. Substantive Due Process. Substantively, renders strong state tolerates measures insure safety, leaves large, potentially dangerous, latitude policies means.5 24 all, support liberties three branches government, burden carried own alone. always pay degree deference judgment, especially concur, particular circumstances. Close maximum respect judiciary does invest confer will. Nothing Constitution requires sufferance hostile scheme government. 26 doubt tolerate impounding essential state. Even resident, friendly bail, period, arrangements. enemy confined seized administered hostility assumed allegiance 1881; Zittman 341 446, 71 832, 95 1096, 471, 846, 1112. 27 If permit fact imputed hostility, suppose war institutions confined, though us. both cases, consideration system defend itself, changing strategy attack infiltration met changed tactics defense. concept paralyzing forbids preventive measure threatened dangers injuries suffered. citizen default bail peace good behavior.6 usually express verbal threats, reason same threats inferred proper procedures British, habit, dictum, limited class pass 'sentence detention' satisfied expedient protection public.7 29 conclude inconsistent substantive process, provided—and my dissent begins—he accorded 30 III. Procedural fairness, meant most uncompromisingly requires. elemental flexible yields times, varies conditions, defers judgment. Insofar technical specialized responsibility competence bend Government, matters compromise conceded matter is? untaught layman charlatan lawyer answer regularity indispensable essence liberty. Severe endured fairly impartially applied. Indeed, choice, prefer live Soviet faith common-law enforced Let overlooked sole benefit accused. insurance blunders lasting stains justice occur parte consideration. 317, near miss, saved perpetrating injustice. See Knauff, Ellen Story (New York) 1952. 33 may, rightly does, citizen. basic vary used just, shoud extended simplify condemnation citizens. unfair citizens, them helpless handicapped alien. root holdings official claim deportable class. 616. 34 scrupulous observance know charge, confronted accuser, cross-examine produce one's behalf, occasion future misconduct, rather crimes committed. Both old newer British 'preventive safeguarded contrary, Nazi regime Germany installed 'protective custody' arrested process,8 concentration camps populated victims summary Communist travesty. differences, between authoritarian differences difference reign terror Quite unconsciously, am theory 'safekeeping' victim charges, reasons, proceeding, unmistakable overtones Nazis detaining Such practice, intentions, drift oppression disadvantaged surely elsewhere. apprehensive surmises 'such stuff dreams on' appears testimony top concerning applicant rights.' entry, follow all? Does effectuated happen seem appropriate authorities? effectuate eject bodily set adrift rowboat. Would condemned judicially law? Suppose decide disable confiscating valuables money. taking Here lies property; occurring territorial waters, meet 36 hearing, course, accomplished turning land sea. indefinite enforcing exclusion, informed chance overcome them. entrapped reliance refuses honor. evident step came. Confinement ancillary exclusion; now alternative normal end itself. 38 conspiratorial technique poses sorely tempts resort suspects secretly judged. discount evil. apprehensions form equally aroused refuse recognize Communism see anything else. ample determine policy. limitation officers jurisdiction; notice charges.9 40 inconceivable simple dealing believe gone. 101 F.Supp. 66. Cir., 195 F.2d 964. 67. 67, 70; R. 26—27. 968. 970. Section 22, c. 81, Stat. 559, 21, 1941, 210, 55 252, U.S.C. 223, provides pertinent part: 'When existence 27, whenever exists between, among, states, interests require prohibitions addition provided otherwise imposed persons proclamation thereof, shall, Congress, unlawful— '(a) attempt rules, regulations, orders, limitations exceptions prescribe; * *.' cover dates relevant 66 54, 57, 96, 137, 330, 332. Pursuant authority, Presidential Proclamation 2523, Fed.Reg. 5821, U.S.Code Cong.Service p. 883, part provided: 'No permitted satisfaction Secretary rules hereinbefore prescribed State, concurrence General.' applicable condified Part 175 CFR. 175.53 defines eleven categories 'deemed States.' delegation upheld. ratified confirmed 2850, 5173, 17, 1949, 2618. CFR 175.57 provides: Entry cases. (a) Any possession enter, exempted §§ 175.41 175.62, inclusive, obtaining applies excludable forth 175.53. excluding immediately report head department, communicate State. deported consultation '(b) ground be, 175.53, reported representative. appeal decision determines 210. Of permit, issuable 210(b), entitles inadmissible entry. 210(f), 202(g). unaware this; 202(g) directs 'printed conspicuously every visa.' recent study recommendations, Report President's Commission (1953), 10. 707, 707; Larsen, 165 433. 151, 151. 154, 154. (Supp. V) 156, 156. noted unusual delay involved case.' 537. (Emphasis added.) permits suspension needed behalf Manifestly fall provision retained 237(d) 1227(d), 212(d)(5) Act, 188, 1182(d)(5), vests new 136(p, q), q); 137—5(a, b), b). Those provisions here. S. Rep. 1515, 81st Cong., 2d Sess. 643—644. Decree Central Committee Council Commissars, U.S.S.R., Nov. 1934; Collection Laws, 1935, 11, Art. 84. Hazard, Materials Law, (194), 16. Reforming Criminal Jour.Crim.Law Crim. 157, 168—169 (1939). also Berman, Principles 56 Yale L.J. 803 (1947). Somersett's Case, How.St.Tr. 1; Campbell, Lives Chief Justices, 418; Fiddes, Mansfield Sommersett 50 L.Q.Rev. 499. recite alleged try merits, consider well-pleaded allegations petition. Petitioner fail hearing; one? Holmes, Court, said 12—13, 369: 'If petitioner, Toy's regarded, jurisdiction (198 (253) (1040) 1044), difficult theoretically practically, turn get wish China. prevented going desired take, him, unanimous Bird Jones, Q.B. 742. speculate niceties. petitioner gains entrance allowed frontier wrongly look actual facts. De facto locked up will.' Testimony Almanza Tripp, Senate Subcommittee 15, included following: '* Now, sort, central contains derogatory admissibility disproved. sufficient proceedings, conducted manner 'You give protection, you remember applicant. (Hearings Amendments Displaced Persons Judiciary, 1st Sessions 665.) Toyosaburo Korematsu 323 214, 65 193, 89 194. 3043, 3043; cf. Code McKinney's Consolidated II, 21(2). Hermann Go ring, cross-examination, following statements: (T)hose committed treason state, proved act, naturally over others, expect acts, yet them, protective custody, camps. Likewise, reasons someone purely reviewed court.' claimed (though seemed specious) twenty-four hours forty-eight attorney. 'But rescinded politically custody. These opportunity making protest.' International Military Tribunal Proceedings 420—421 (March 18, 1946). trial reconcile claims suggesting camera enough enable legality confinement. refused. how handled kind counsel, present, disclosures hard testing cross-examination counter- for. questions raised proposal discussed call

Category: 3