News & Insights

Key Facts:

• New York passed a law in 1881 requiring a $1 tax on each immigrant arriving at its ports.
• The funds were intended to cover inspection efforts for identifying criminals, paupers, orphans, and those deemed a public burden.
• The law was challenged as an unconstitutional interference with Congress’s power to regulate commerce and impose duties.

Analysis:

• Commerce Clause Violation:
  • The U.S. Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority over foreign commerce. By taxing immigrants arriving from foreign countries, New York was interfering with Congress’s power.
  • The Supreme Court had previously invalidated similar state laws in Henderson v. Mayor of New York and Chy Lung v. Freeman.
• Inspection Laws Argument:
  • New York claimed the tax supported its “inspection laws,” which allowed officials to screen immigrants for criminality or inability to support themselves.
  • The Court rejected this argument, explaining that inspection laws, historically and constitutionally, apply to property (e.g., goods), not free individuals.
• Constitutional References to Persons:
  • The Court analyzed the Constitution’s use of terms like “imports,” “exports,” and “migration.” It concluded these terms, as used in the Constitution, do not apply to free individuals arriving at U.S. ports.
• Conflict with Federal Law:
  • After New York passed its tax, Congress enacted its own federal immigration law imposing a 50-cent duty per immigrant for similar purposes. This federal law superseded any conflicting state laws.