## Facts

- Clive Michael Boutilier, a Canadian citizen, was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident in 1955 and reentered after a brief trip in 1959; his immediate family largely lived in the United States.
- During a later naturalization process, Boutilier disclosed a 1959 New York arrest on a sodomy charge that was reduced and dismissed after the complainant failed to appear.
- At the government’s request, Boutilier submitted a further affidavit describing a history of homosexual experiences beginning at age 14, continuing several times per year before his 1955 entry and at a similar frequency after entry, along with some heterosexual relations.
- Immigration officials sent the affidavits to the U.S. Public Health Service, which certified that at the time of his 1955 admission he was afflicted with a “class A condition,” described as “psychopathic personality, sexual deviate.”
- Deportation proceedings were brought under INA § 241(a)(1) on the theory that he was excludable “at the time of entry” under INA § 212(a)(4), which excluded “aliens afflicted with psychopathic personality, epilepsy, or a mental defect.”
- Boutilier declined an in-person Public Health Service examination but submitted letters from psychiatrists stating he was not a “psychopathic personality” in medical terms.

## Issues

1. Whether INA § 212(a)(4)’s exclusion of “aliens afflicted with psychopathic personality” covered homosexuality such that an alien who was homosexual at the time of entry was excludable and therefore deportable under INA § 241(a)(1).
2. Whether, as applied in this context, the term “psychopathic personality” was unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the deportation order.
- The Court held that Congress intended “psychopathic personality” in INA § 212(a)(4) to include homosexuals as an excludable class.
- The Court concluded that the statute, construed to cover homosexuality in light of legislative history and common understanding, was not void for vagueness under the Fifth Amendment.
- The Court treated the dispositive inquiry as Boutilier’s status at the time of his 1955 admission, and found the record sufficient to place him within the excludable class.

## Legal Principles

- An alien may be deported under INA § 241(a)(1) if, at the time of entry, the alien belonged to a class of persons excludable under the immigration laws.
- In interpreting an immigration exclusion ground, Congress’s intended meaning may control even if the statutory phrase uses terminology that differs from prevailing medical classifications.
- A vagueness challenge fails where the statutory term, as construed in context and informed by legislative purpose, provides sufficiently definite notice and standards to support its application.
- Immigration classifications concerning admissibility and exclusion are reviewed with substantial deference to congressional judgment.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld deportation based on a finding that INA § 212(a)(4)’s reference to “psychopathic personality” was a legislative term intended to exclude homosexuals, and it rejected a Fifth Amendment vagueness challenge when applied to an alien shown to have been homosexual at the time of entry.


Boutilier v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 387 U.S. 118 (1967)