## Facts

- Congress enacted § 6 of the Geary Act (1892), requiring Chinese laborers lawfully in the United States to obtain a federal certificate of residence within a year.
- The statute deemed any Chinese laborer found without a certificate unlawfully present and subject to arrest and deportation, unless he proved unavoidable cause for nonregistration and proved prior residence through “at least one credible white witness.”
- Fong Yue Ting, Wong Quan, and Lee Joe were Chinese laborers who had lived in the United States for years but did not obtain certificates.
- Federal officers arrested the petitioners in New York without a warrant under the statute’s enforcement provisions.
- Each petitioner sought habeas corpus relief, arguing the registration-and-deportation scheme and evidentiary requirement were unconstitutional.
- The federal circuit court dismissed the petitions and ordered the petitioners remanded for deportation; the petitioners appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Congress may require long-resident Chinese laborers to register and carry certificates of residence and authorize deportation for noncompliance.
2. Whether § 6’s arrest-and-deportation procedures and its “credible white witness” evidentiary requirement violate constitutional protections applicable to persons within the United States.
3. Whether a later federal statute may be enforced domestically even if it conflicts with earlier treaty commitments.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissals and denied habeas relief, upholding § 6 as constitutional.
- The Court held that the national power to exclude and expel aliens is an incident of sovereignty committed to the political branches and subject to limited judicial control.
- The Court treated deportation as a civil measure, not criminal punishment, and concluded that Congress could authorize removal through executive administration with only the judicial involvement Congress chose to provide.
- The Court upheld Congress’s authority to prescribe evidentiary conditions for proving a right to remain, including the statute’s specified witness requirement.
- The Court held that when a statute within Congress’s authority clearly conflicts with an earlier treaty, the statute governs as domestic law.

## Legal Principles

- The federal government’s authority to exclude or expel aliens may be exercised by Congress as a political function tied to national sovereignty.
- Deportation is characterized as a noncriminal governmental act; consequently, Congress may provide procedures different from those required in criminal prosecutions.
- Congress may establish a registration and identification system for a class of aliens and make continued presence contingent on compliance.
- Congress may assign administration of deportation to executive officers and may limit the judiciary’s role to the fact-finding Congress specifies.
- A later-in-time federal statute, if valid and clear, prevails over inconsistent provisions of an earlier treaty in domestic enforcement.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Congress’s power to mandate registration of Chinese laborers and to order deportation for failure to comply, sustaining a regime largely implemented by executive officers and accepting Congress’s specified evidentiary conditions, while also confirming that valid later statutes control over conflicting earlier treaties in domestic law.


Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698 (1893)