Cruikshanks. 92 U. S.. 542. 550.) In accordance with these principles. If the State of South Carolina had undertaken by legislative act to prescribe the conditions under which aliens might be admitted to her ports. to grant or deny the privilege of entry. to authorize measures which Congress had denounced. to forbid measures which Congress had sanctioned. or to " regulate" in. any other way the immigration or importation of aliens. such legislation would be void. But she has done none of these things. she has enacted a law designed to encourage and assist the Immigration of foreign laborers to her territory. on the assumption that this action on her part was not forbidden by Federal laws. leaving to those laws the determination of whether any foreign laborers seeking entry should be excluded. Congress. on the other hand. while it has passed numcl ous laws to regulate immigration. denying altogether admission to certain classes of aliens and penalizing certain acts of assistance or encouragement. has neither prohibited the immigration of aliens gen. erally and without distinction nor proscribed all modes of assistance or encouragement by whomsoever employed. The question to be considered. therefore. is reduced to this: Has Congress forbidden the use of the particular mode of assistance or encouragement employed in the present case. notwithstanding that a State is the actor tirough its authorized agent? First. as to the persons against whom the prohibitions of the contractlabor laws are directed.
Keywords matched
immigration Immigration