Document: 335 U.S. 188 68 S.Ct. 1443 92 L.Ed. 1898 AHRENS et al.v.CLARK, Atty. Gen. No. 446. Argued March 29, 1948. Decided June 21, Mr. James J. Laughlin, of Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Philip B. Perlman, Sol. Gen., respondent. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion Court. 1 The initial question presented in this case is one we reserved Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 283, 305, 65 208, 220, 89 243, viz., whether presence within territorial jurisdiction District Court person detained prerequisite to filing a petition writ habeas corpus. 2 Petitioners are some 120 Germans who being held at Ellis Island, New York, deportation Germany. Their has been directed under removal orders issued by Attorney General found that each them dangerous public peace and safety United States because he adhered government with which war or principles thereof. These were issued, Presidential Proclamation 2655 July 14, 1945, 10 Fed.Reg. 8947, pursuant Alien Enemy Act 1798, R.S. § 4067, 50 U.S.C. U.S.C.A. 21. challenged these petitions writs corpus on several grounds, principal all exceed statutory authority they after actual hostilities Germany ceased. 3 filed Columbia alleged petitioners confined 'subject custody control' General. Respondent moved dismiss because, inter alia, outside confines Columbia. order granting motion was affirmed Appeals. 4 statute, 28 452, provides: 5 'The justices Supreme judges f circuit courts appeal district courts, their respective jurisdictions, shall have power grant purpose an inquiry into cause restraint liberty. A judge same his district; be entered records court wherein complained had.' 6 threshold words 'within jurisdictions' limit inquiries causes restraints liberty those restrained jurisdictions courts. There few cases fours present one, precise not having frequently arisen lower federal But general view so confined. McGowan v. Moody, 22 App.D.C. 148, 158 seq.; In re Bickley, Fed.Cas. page 332, 1,387. And see Boles, 8 Cir., 48 F. 75; Gouyet, 175 230, 233; Day, F.2d 816, 817; Jones Biddle, 131 853, 854; Schlotfeldt, 7 136 935, 940.1 Cf. Sanders Allen, 69 307, 100 717; Tippitt Wood, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 140 689. That our view. We start from accepted premise apart specific exceptions created Congress territorial. See Georgia Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 439, 467, 468, 716, 731, 1051, cited. It sufficient jailer custodian alone jurisdiction. Although whose party detained, 455, scheme contemplates procedure may bring prisoner before court. For 458 provides making return time body granted writ.' Walker Johnston, 312 275, 61 574, 85 830. would take compelling reasons conclude contemplated production prisoners remote sections, perhaps thousands miles writ. opportunities escape afforded travel, cost transportation, administrative burden such undertaking negate purpose. matters policy counsel us construe jurisdictional provision statute conventional sense, even though situations where tried convicted might seem offer advantages. 9 history supports came law as February 5, 1867, 14 Stat. 385. August 1842, 539. Prior date it must obtain Graham, 5,657, Wash.C.C. 211;2 Fed. Cas. Davis, 14,926, Cranch C.C. 622. bill introduced Senate thought contain infirmity. objection made floor permit 'a Florida him men sentenced imprisonment State Vermont any further States.' Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 2d Sess. 730. As result Senator Trumbull, had charge bill, offered amendment added jurisdictions.' Ibid. 790. adopted satisfactory solutiono imagined difficulty.3 Id. Thus issue this4 restricted supported language considerations policy, legislative enactment. therefore do feel free weigh advanced giving discretion like this. If concept imported so. willing waive point, make decision merits. restriction placed act. Hence waived parties. Griffin, 303 226, 229, 58 601, 602, 603, 82 764. 11 supra, opposed petitioner suit instituted but subsequently removed different circuit. held, conformity underlying Rule 45(1) Court, following section 354, defeated manner, no matter how proper motive behind removal. decided situation can act long reach petitioner. 12 Since there defect remains uncured, Gee ral respondent (see §§ 455 458; Wales Whitney, 114 564, 1050, 1054, 1055, 29 277; supra; Bennett, 80 32, 148 19) and, if not, waived, do. pages 305—307, 221, 243. 13 Affirmed. RUTLEDGE, whom BLACK MURPHY join, dissenting. 15 turn taken gives importance beyond serious questions tendered merits petitioners' application. They alien enemies interned during nation's safety. now seek avoid country takes care personal liberties, when its hospitality abused, denied own citizens rights until structure tyranny fell ruins. Whether forfeited right continued enjoyment institutions life foster, forfeiture declared executed lawfully authority, indeed important questions, upon much entitled hearing Ludecke. Ludecke Watkins, 160, 1429. 16 putting aside petitioners, cuts more sweepingly roots individual freedom than could disposition issues. attenuates security every citizen. So does contraction availability first puts narrow rigid limitation issuance inferior Heretofore constrictive formulations avoided generally, assiduously, out regard writ's great office vindication See, e.g., Bowen 306 19, 26—28, 59 442, 445—447, 83 455; 304—307, 219—221, 243; Price 334 266, 1049; Wade Mayo, 672, 1270.1 17 today's ruling, departing only place confinement lies limits court's purely geographic fact determines competence merely venue accommodation exercise among tribunals coordinate power, allowing room adaptability varying circumstances. crucial between total impotence. All other put side. Neither jailer's amenability process nor ability willingness produce cure basic infirmity, accident choice locus happens fall physical line. 18 become law, full ramifications difficult foresee. classic scope exposition place,2 historic efficacy destroyed. absence conclusive against existence writ, what imprisonment, private action, unknown? What also located district, served another?3 detention wholly jurisdiction, although persons exercising cla rly remedy, American wrongfully deprived Americans answerable deprive it, purporting officially otherwise? jailers stand defiance judicial plead either limitations, astuteness selecting place, nullify competence? To none give answer, purports reserve concerning them. Yet all, rests solely body's presence, absence4 will render impotent grasp be, test prescribed, conjunction issue. On hand, relief given cases, exist, then true stripped afford Court's grounding neither necessary case. 19 By thus elevating level exclusive criterion, controlling effect factor generally regarded little purposes functioning historically conceived. Perhaps nature availability, character proceeding, Judge Cooley, quoted part approval supra: 20 observed mode is, to, upon, confined, jailer. former except through latter. officer serves unbar prison doors, set free, relieves oppressor release constraint. whole force spent * relief, guilty process, compelled grasp. difficulty affording redress increased state, greater distance affect it. control exercised?'5 21 proceeding analogous jurisdictionally rem quasi anomalously developed common trespass reality.6 prime remedy invasion hardly highly proceedings possess, speaking, remedial injuries property. Those powers which, Cooley pointed relation state tribunals,7 constantly exert extraterritorial effects equity. This exaltation element potentially destructive consequences, makes reason conception meaning phrase, jurisdictions,' 452; insertion; certain relating especially penal authorities distant places require reading given. I think compel significance, evils seeks escape. 23 problem facts involves two questions. first, reach. consideration other, difference doubt due emphasis sort. answer turns custody8 subject production. my are. 24 principle forbids formulation limitations use prerogative respects, inconsistent performin circumstances, limiting called unlawfully impose technical niceties agent, superior subordinate immediacy remoteness incidence restrain. Jurisdictionally should enough named him.9 25 General's complete leading up directing country;10 claims decide directed. all-pervasive over fortunes, cannot doubted resist 'an liberty' cases.11 26 Moreover, amenability, official capacity, searching acts lawful authority,12 claim immunity respect. 27 requisite conceived historically, present. He amenable Indeed respond end, power.13 Unless totally wanting insuperable obstacle urge, suggests, dicta decisions, wee note 18, lacking reason. so, wording, compels conclusions.14 language, however, purport define 'their terms held. Indeed, indication creates defect, wit consequence contrary, wording phrase consistent regarding attaching acquires service elsewhere, invert factors manner construction. Congress, concerned problem, rather possibility, abuse issuing requiring places, maladjustment follow, concludes, sought solve problems sitting detention. appear, dealing broader possibility abuse, while nothing history, authorization solve, shows contemplated. 30 perspective, turning concerned, emphasize alternative holding heard whenever served. Rather circumstance normally induce decline disregarded exceptional circumstances desires finds justice particular demands. 31 Even territorial, recall, already stated, instituted. terminate without leaving sense stated exercised District. Disti ct clashing easily adjusted; oppression suitors, too intolerable endured,' deal.15 32 When both court16 separated elsewhere,17 weight conclusion reached day.18 With class concerned. But, yet alone, opinion, deal. position regardless location restrained.19 light prevailing 33 Principal reliance 1867 amendment. requires nor, justifies consists short statement Johnson, followed brief colloquy, led insertion phrase. Cong.Globe, 730, 790, 899. seems quite clear about arising bill's broad introduced.20 confer districts, create departure usual rule, others, run wished sure effect. ud erlying assumption entire discussion that, proposed unlimited districts throughout country, comparable said borders,21 distance. 34 proposal acceptance amendment, i.e., detain required ordered. word latter situation, suggest concern amendment's inclusion. Johnson anyone else mind another, process.22 ruling ignore. 35 Confining running course very thing confining prisoner's limits. Most importantly, less most needed, proceeding. completely satisfied, intended effect, limited object. taken, prevent section's otherwise phrasing authorizing limitation, cf. cited; trench utility safeguard freedom. hint restrictive measure fact, reduce, expand availability.23 36 statute's purpose, convenience relies bolster influence validity. conception, hitherto traditional high dictate resolving doubt, possible constructions, conditions devices restrained. 37 Especially since provide adequate envisages. proceed admitted, away unqualified invoke 38 done here overriding objection, clearly vast majority available convenient forum, duty discretion, correction review, petitioner's inconvenient inappropriate forum. Beard 72 269, 578, 580, 581. 39 independent affairs, peculiar interest namely, affecting borders, consistently applied necessitate.24 40 court.25 distinguish supra. agree reservation distinction made. goes far destroy validity decision's grounding. 41 Cases type recently application original military Japan. Betz, 329 67 39, 91 593; Durant, Wills, 40, Cutino, 594; Walczak, 41, McKinley, Murphy, 594. Some States; civilians, others members armed forces. instances sentences imposed offenses, death penalty one. claimed indefinite periods trial. 42 raised profound importance.26 deemed controlling, resolved future arise ignore relied today, just today ignores reasoning Endo. irremediable void capacity act, lawyers call fundamental hard gap filled extraneous rule 45(1), override imposed. 43 event, subscribe laid down criterion capricious consequences nature, availability. beginning, lay flooding applications large. entirely another tie hands, strict defeat many needed. 44 Not least unknown apply behalf. Without knowing confinement, unable sustain establishing land. Such detention, Duncan Kahanamoku, 327 304, 66 S.C. 606, 90 688; Milligan, Wall. 2, 281; Matter Stacy, Johns., N.Y. 328; mass evacuation groups area emergency consequent disruption means keeping order, Hirabayashi States, 320 81, 63 1375, 87 1774; possibly, hoped often, wilful misconduct arbitrary executive officials overreaching constitutional authority. dangers unreal States. experience fortunate countries serve warning unwarrant curtailment protect 45 Accordingly, dissent judgment case, certainly inadequate, am Fong Yim, 134 938; Ng Quong Ming, 135 378. governed Washington follows, Fed.Cas.No.5,657, 211, 212: 'It equity specially bestowed, necessarily organization allotted divided; denominated district—and division appointment local tribunals, holden. Were otherwise, send compulsory precess draw itself persons, things, endured.' read, 'That addition conferred her violation constitution, treaty *.' need determine any, employ assert rights. Sunal Large, 332 174, dissenting opinions 184, 187, 1588, 1594, 1595, 1982. text infra 5. direct sits, ex rel. Corsetti Commanding Officer Camp Upton, F.R.D. 360, questionable turnkey constitute custodian. Goodman Roberts, 152 841. Further pleading proof establish Jackson, Mich. 417, 440. 306, At later point Cooley's continued: 'There inherent case; chancery, performance, exerts foreign similar here. belief, Fed.Cas.No.14,926, 622, warrant it.T conflicting decisions. incidental remarks applying me significance. attention point. *' (Emphasis added.) 441. Emerson Guthner, 107 Colo. 83, 108 P.2d 866; Crowell Crowell, 190 Ga. 501, S.E.2d 628; Shaw Shaw, 300, 103 S.E. 526; Queen Barnardo, Q.B.D. 283; Matthews, I.R.C.L. cited Church, Habeas Corpus (2d Ed.) 109. Endo reserving decide, said: expressions indicate enable (cases infra). 440:' Then ending words, respondent;' together citation Restatement, Conflict Laws, 624 Special Note (Tent. Draft 1929); Proposed Final Question Suggested Discussion, 624; Note, Ky.L.J. 462. 'writ detained.' Rev. 755, 455. notes 17. Executive acting 'who aforesaid enemy governments thereof depart therefrom accordance regulations prescribe.' 2655, 8947. proclamation 577. Furthermore, Solicitor points brief, 'no why permitting Government another.' Fed.Rules Civil Procedure, 4(f), 723c, 723c. Upon properly speedy determination merits, delay incident reaching proceedings. viewpoint Government's remove terminating expedition desirable. 1925 providing 'the had' 26, mere recording requirement applicable individually. Appropriately distinguished recorded routine procedure, whereas vacation special treatment. session, did apply, enacted relate back readily mean 'wherein exercised' located.' 212. opinion. 16, 18. 211; 230; Yee Hick Ho, 360; 816 (in appear court, challenge jurisdiction); 853; 935. 622; 1,387; 148; 378; 717. 689; Burns Welch, 81 384, 159 29. Of Moody Bickley accord decision. distinguishable. ground Secretary Navy. 163, 164. decisions infra. rest 'competent asked for' uses term 'jurisdiction,' well known 'jurisdiction' often used 'venue,' adjudicated today. intimates 'freely conceded.' 333, 334. prior read pertinently follows: 'Be enacted, &c., Constitution suggested, commented honorable chairman me. suggested necessity day know Chief laws extends Union. satisfied lead practical evil. removes difficulty.' statements Johnson's statement. liberalizing respects. Substantively, authorized relieve Procedurally, extendd custody. Harv.L.Rev. 657, 659. '(N)o intent Ibid., n. 22. Reformatory Lorton, Virginia, Workhouse Occoquan, Virginia. Persons violations Code. resident maintains headquarters obvious reasons, Appeals inmates Under hereafter Virginia inconvenience parties extent face apparently earlier 148. explained declined 717, 719, infra, or, implication, 20, 2. Both grounds longer regards Mood proposition cites logical inconsistency highlighted citation, approval, expressly assumed tribunal had. 158. Navy behalf Marine imprisoned Guam. Wolfson, Abroad Corpus, F.Bar.J. 142.

Category: 0