Corruption Chronicles ...because no one is above the law

Promoting Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in Government, Politics and the Law

Illegal Immigrants’ Constitutional Rights Violated?

Comments

Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580

Harisiades v. Shaughnessy

No. 43

Argued December 5, 1951

Decided March 10, 1952*

342 U.S. 580

Syllabus

1. The Alien Registration Act of 1940, so far as it authorizes the deportation of a legally resident alien because of membership in the Communist Party, even though such membership terminated before enactment of the Act, was within the power of Congress under the Federal Constitution. Pp. 342 U. S. 581-596.

(a) The Act does not deprive the alien of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Pp. 342 U. S. 584-591.

(1) The power to deport aliens is inherent in every sovereign state. Pp. 342 U. S. 587-588.

(2) The policy toward aliens is so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of the Government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference, and it cannot be said that the power has been so unreasonably or harshly exercised by Congress in this Act as to warrant judicial interference. Pp. 342 U. S. 588-590.

(3) The fact that the Act inflicts severe hardship on the individuals affected does not render it violative of the Due Process Clause. Pp. 342 U. S. 590-591.

(b) The Act does not abridge the aliens' freedoms of speech and assembly in contravention of the First Amendment. Pp. 342 U. S. 591-592.

(c) The Act does not contravene the provision of Art. I, § 9 of the Constitution forbidding ex post facto laws. Pp. 342 U. S. 593-596.

2. Procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act are not mandatory as to proceedings which were instituted before the effective date of the Act. P. 583, n 4.

Page 342 U. S. 581

3. One who consented to the same individual acting both as presiding officer and examining officer in administrative proceedings is without standing, on judicial review, to raise the objection that he was thereby denied procedural due process. P. 583, n 4.

187 F.2d 137 affirmed.

The cases are stated in the opinion of the Court, pp. 342 U. S. 581-584. The judgments are affirmed, p. 342 U. S. 596.


We can send their US born kids with them!

There is nothing in the 14th Ammendment preventing the US from sending their US born kids with them. Nor is there ANY precident for the child of 2 Illegals being a citizen by birth.

Since the parents are here illegally, the precident of children born to parents of foreign diplomats could easily apply giving all a bum's rush

There is nothing in the 14th Ammendment preventing denial of citizenship to children whose parents conspired to have their children born in the US.

Even if they enter legally, conspiring to have their children born here for citizenship is an illegal act.

Only precident is for children of LEGAL resident Aliens. (Wong Ark Kim Vs US) Though a correct decision, the arguments supporting it were poor and should be refined. (Subjects who reside in American possessions that are not commonwealths only & Green Card holders)




Judicial Watch News
First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
State:


 Subscribe via RSS
(c) 2009 Judicial Watch | user login