Chinese exclusion cases
Chinese exclusion cases refer to a series of U.S. Supreme Court rulings from 1884 to 1905 that addressed various Chinese Exclusion Acts, which were laws aimed at restricting Chinese immigration. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 marked the beginning of these restrictions, prohibiting most Chinese laborers from entering the United States. Subsequent legislation, including the Scott Act of 1888 and the Geary Act of 1892, further tightened these restrictions, ultimately leading to a complete ban on Chinese immigration in 1920 that lasted until 1943.
The Supreme Court upheld the authority of Congress to regulate immigration, often interpreting the laws in ways that severely limited due process rights for those affected. Notable cases included Chew Heong v. United States, which allowed a resident to reenter the U.S., and Chae Chan Ping v. United States, which upheld a ban on reentry for a resident who had obtained a certificate before the Scott Act. The rulings reflected a broader societal belief that Chinese immigrants posed a threat to national security and social cohesion.
The legacy of these cases continues to influence contemporary discussions on immigration, highlighting the intersections of race, ethnicity, and legal frameworks in the U.S. immigration system. The eventual repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1943 allowed for limited immigration and naturalization of Chinese nationals, marking a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy.
Chinese exclusion cases
THE CASES: Series of United States (US) Supreme Court rulings on the Chinese Exclusion Acts
DATES: 1884-1905
SIGNIFICANCE: When making decisions regarding the various Chinese Exclusion Acts, the Supreme Court examined the legislation's language and attempted to discern Congress's intent. As a consequence, almost no immigrants from China entered the country from the 1880s until World War II.
The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited most Chinese laborers from entering the country. The Scott Act (1888), the Geary Act of 1892, and the McCreary Amendment of 1893 added additional restrictions. The 1920 revision of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 entirely closed the door on all further immigration, and the door continued to be closed until 1943. In reviewing these laws, the Supreme Court consistently acknowledged that the US Constitution gave Congress the plenary power to decide which foreign persons might be kept out of the country. The Court, however, often had to interpret various aspects of the law, and it also made several of rulings about the due process standards that applied to the thousands of Chinese who had resided in the country before 1882.
In the first of the cases, Chew Heong v. United States (1884), the petitioner had lived in the US before 1882, but he had visited China before the amendment of 1884 required residents to obtain a reentry certificate. In this instance, the Court decided to allow his reentry. After the Scott Act entirely prohibited reentry, the petitioner in Chae Chan Ping v. United States (1889) was a resident who had obtained a reentry certificate before the statute was enacted. In this case, Ping was denied admission. In upholding the Scott Act, the Court recognized that Congress had unlimited power to modify or abrogate treaties with foreign countries. Writing the majority opinion, Justice Stephen J. Field declared that the US “considers the presence of foreigners of a different race in this country, who will not assimilate with us, to be dangerous to its peace and security.”
While recognizing that minimal standards of due process were required in immigration and deportation proceedings, the Supreme Court put almost no limits on the power of Congress to define which standards and rules applied. When Fong Yue Ting and two other Chinese residents were found not to have the required residency certificates, they were ordered to be deported. In the resulting case of Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893), the Supreme Court upheld the deportations. It recognized that the government’s power to deport foreigners “is as absolute and unqualified as the right to prohibit and prevent their entrance into the country.” Likewise, when Congress authorized immigration officials to exclude foreigners from admission without any habeas corpus relief, the Supreme Court upheld this procedure in Lem Moon Sing v. United States (1895), which meant that immigration officials no longer had to worry about judges looking over their shoulders. In the case of United States v. Ju Toy (1905), the Court even allowed Congress to deny writs of habeas corpus for persons claiming to be US citizens.
Although immigration restrictions would not receive their most significant reform until the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which ended the national quotas placed on immigration since the 1920s, the Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed in 1943 with the passage of the Magnuson Act. This repeal occurred during World War II, as China became a key ally in the US’s war against Japan. A small annual quota of 105 Chinese immigrants was established, and Chinese nationals residing in the US were allowed to become naturalized US citizens. The legacy of Chinese exclusion cases resonates in the contemporary discourse on immigration for several reasons. It was one of the first indicators of race and ethnicity's complex role in US immigration. The fear that was attached to Chinese immigrants can be found in twenty-first-century discussions of national security and border patrol. Chinese exclusion cases set several legal precedents and had lasting cultural and social impacts on the fabric of American society.
Bibliography
"Chae Chan Ping v. United States (1889) (aka the Chinese Exclusion Case)." Immigration History, immigrationhistory.org/item/chae-chan-ping-v-united-states-1889-aka-the-chinese-exclusion-case. Accessed 2 Sept. 2024.
Chang, Iris. The Chinese in America: A Narrative History. New York: Viking Press, 2003.
Johnson, Rachel. "Confronting the Legacy of Chinese Exclusion." Facing History, 5 May 2023, www.facinghistory.org/ideas-week/confronting-legacy-chinese-exclusion. Accessed 2 Sept. 2024.
Kim, Hyung-Chan, editor. Asian Americans and the Supreme Court: A Documentary History. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1992.
McClain, Charles J. In Search of Equality: The Chinese Struggle Against Discrimination in Nineteenth-Century America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.
Salyer, Lucy. Laws as Harsh as Tigers: Chinese Immigrants and the Shaping of Modern Immigration Law. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995.