They expected to secure a decision of the court that the law was unconstitutional. and they came to the court for that purpose. The law was decided to be constitutional. but meanwhile the year allowed for registration had elapsed. Five of the nine judges. one being absent. decided in accordance with Justice Fields opinion in the former case under the Scott act. decided precisely as the whole of them decided then. that these men are subject to deportation because they are to be disposed of. notby accusation of a criminal offense. but under the political power which authorizes us to remove them without any process whatever save that of force. so tempered by mercy as the dictates of humanity or the discretion of the deporting power may choose. Five justices followed Justice Fields decision in the case under the Scott act. three dissenting. and Justice Field himself. reasserting his former opinion. places his dissent in this last case simply and solely upon the ground that these men are in the country. while in the former case the Chinaman was not physically present. Those men who had passed out of the country temporarily. with our license to return in their pockets. he holds that we have a right to exclude. but thinks that it is an outrage to exclude those who have refused to procure their certificates of indentification under the Geary law.
Keywords matched
deportation deporting